Pertti Luntinen

French Information on the RUSSIAN WAR PLANS 1880-1914 Societas Historica Finlandiae Suomen Historiallinen Seura Finska Historiska Samfundet

Studia Historica 17 Pertti Luntinen French Information on the RUSSIAN WAR PLANS 1880 1914

SHS • Helsinki • 1984 Cover design by Rauno Enden

ISSN 0081-6493 ISBN 951-9254-60-9

Gummerus Oy:n kirjapainossa Jyväskylässä 1984 Contents

1. PREFACE 7 2. THE FRANCO-RUSSIAN ALLIANCE IS BORN 11 2.1. The Diplomatic Background 11 2.2. The Military Convention 14 2.3. The Russian Army by the End of the Eighties 21 2.4. The Russian Ally Evalued in 1892 24 2.5. Troop Mobilization and Concentration in 1890-1897 33 3. DISTRACTIONS 39 3.1. The Near East 1895-1897 39 3.2. New Commanders 47 3.3. Rearmament and Disarmament 49 3.4. A Central Asian Diversion Against England 53 3.5. Russian Strength at the Turn of the Century 59 3.6. The Military and Constitutional Reform in Finland 63 3.7. Kuropatkin's Plans for War in the West 65 3.8. If Francis Joseph Should Die 69 3.9. The Dual Alliance Strengthened 73 3.10. Military Co-Operation Promised 76 4. ADVENTURE AND DEFEAT 82 4.1. Far Eastern Schemes 82 4.2. Russia's Strength Disappears to the Far East 86 4.3. The Defeat of an Ally 90 4.4. Changes in Russian Government and Politics 95 4.5. Powerless Russia 98 4.6. National Minority Problems in the Military Reconstruction 103 5. A SLOW AND DEVIOUS RECONSTRUCTION 107 5.1. Cold Comfort for France 107 5.2. Russia Retreats from the West 116 5.3. The French Are Worried 120 5.4. The Unshaken Intimacy of the Allied General Staffs 123 5.5. Colonel Janin Studies the Russian Army 128 5.6. The Balkan Wars 1912-1913 135 6. NAVAL PLANS 139 6.1. A Naval Convention Discussed 140 6.2. The Calamitous Odyssey 143 6.3. Reorganization 145 6.4. Coastal Defences 150 6.5. Naval Policy 153 6.6. The Naval Convention Signed 156 6.7. Building Programmes 159 7. PREPARING FOR THE GREAT WAR 164 7.1. The Dual Alliance Revitalized 164 7.2. The Problem of Wartime Communication Between the Allies 167 7.3. The Russian Army in 1912 170 7.4. The Problem of the Nationalities Still Unresolved 177 7.5. A Catalogue of Enemies 180 7.6. Planning the Russian Troop Concentration in 1912 184 7.7. Efforts to Improve the Plan 190 7.8. The Grand Programme for Increasing the Russian Army 196 8 CONCLUSION 201 MAPS 207 SOURCES 243 INDEX 247

6 1. Preface

The history of Russia's war plans 1880-1914 has been told by A.M. ZaionckovskiI in 1926.' Since then the original plans have remained in the secrecy of the Soviet archives.2 Not even Soviet scholars have been able to publish anything on the war plans, although the military organization and material preparation have been dealt with many times.3 But in the French war archives in the Castle of Vincennes there is a little additional

A.M. Zaion&kovskii, Plany voiny. Podgotovka Rossii k imperialistiiMarch-April 1917. Princeton University Press 1980. 7 information.' The French military attachés succeeded rather well in their task of spying out the plans of the general staff in St. Petersburg, being representatives of the army that was amie et alliee. I have not avoided repeating the main points of the story told by Zaionckovskii, because his book has been out of print for half a century: originally it was written for service use in the Red Army. In addition, it is necessary to place the additional information brought out in this study within a general framework. In the following study the story has been presented from the viewpoint of the military attaché, because it is of interest to see what the French knew of the Russian plans and how they tried to influence them. The reports of the attachés tally rather well with Zaionckovski's text. Consequently, even the additional information recounted here can, if treated with due care, be taken as true. I have avoided retelling the diplomatic, economic or social background story because it has been dealt with in the numerous histories of the imperialist era.' Only a short sketch of the main turning points is given to paint the background for the military aspect of the story. The protocols of the meetings of the chiefs of general staffs have been published in the French collection of diplomatic documents,' as well as some of the politically important reports of the military attaché. I have tried to refer also to the publication in my footnotes when relevant. The development of the war plans is interesting history as

4 Etat-Major de l'armee de terre, Service historique, Chateau de Vincennes. In footnote references: EMATSH + file number Service Historique de la Marine, Chateau de Vincennes. In footnote references: SHM + file number Copies of the politically most important documents as well as the diplomatic reports are kept in Archives, Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres (nowadays: Archives et Documentation, Ministere des relations exterieures), Quai d'Orsay, Paris. In footnote references: AMAE + series and volume number. 5 No bibliography can be attempted within the space of this study. The reader must be referred to the available handbooks and bibliographies. 6 Documents diplomatiques fransais, l.ser. 1871-1900, I—XVI, Paris 1929- 1959. 2. ser. 1901-1911, I—XIV, Paris 1930-1955. 3. ser. 1911-1914, I—XI, Paris 1929-1960. In footnote references: DDF + series and volume number.

8 such. The plans reflect the reality of life, the desperate search for security in a threatening world, and the elusive dreams of domination and grandeur in competition with other armies. This is part of the prehistory of the Great War. The years 1880-1914 are often called the era of imperialism; imperialism in usually dealt with as an economic phenomenon, but it had a military side, too. This story of the military plans throws some additional light on the French influence on Russia's decisions, and on the influence of the Russian generals on the policy of their country. Reports concerning the Russian plans in or near Finland, in the Baltic area, are of special interest for a Finnish writer. I have, however, tried to avoid giving undue weight to this secondary theatre of operations, the problems of which have been dealt with in detail elsewhere.' Only the most salient features are described, with the necessary background information. Russia's war plans were one of the principal factors shaping the fate of all the Western provinces of the swollen empire.

A grant by the Academy of Finland and the Centre Nationale de Recherche Scientifique made possible the study in the archives of Chateau de Vincennes and Quai d'Orsay, for which I am deeply grateful. Gratitude is due also to the Akademija Nauk SSSR, which enabled me to study in the Lenin Library in Moscow. The University Libraries in Helsinki and Tampere have been most helpful. Many people have helped me with advice, discussion, or patiently listening to complaints about the impossibility of writing history. Kalevan lukio (The Kaleva Senior High School), my employer, magnanimously consented to grant me a lengthy leave of absence from my teaching duties. Dr. George Maude of the University of Turku has taken great pains to correct my English. Rauno Enden of the Finnish Historical Association has carried out the task of editing the text for publication in the Series of the Association. I should be

Tuomo Polvinen, Die finnischen Eisenbahnen in den militärischen und politi- schen Plänen Russlands vor dem ersten Weltkrieg. Helsinki 1962. Pertti Luntinen, Suomi Pietarin suojana ja uhkana venäläisten sotasuunnitel- missa 1854-1914. With an English Summary: Finland, Shield and Threat for St. Petersburg. Historiallinen Arkisto 79, Helsinki 1983. 9 extremely happy if the finished product would in any way be worthy of the trouble so many people have taken to help me in my study.

10 2. The Franco-Russian Alliance Is Born

2.1. The Diplomatic Background

The alliance of Russia with France was born out of mutual isolation. Russia had been made to feel her lonelyness in 1878 when her overblown appetites in the Near East had remained unsatiated in the Berlin Congress in spite of her previous victorious campaign. Then there had been the conflict with England in 1885 on the Afghan borders: a war with England would have involved also a naval threat against Russia's Baltic and/or Black Sea coasts. At the same time the Bulgarians had ungratefully emphasized their independence from Russia. Even though Prince Alexander was succesfully ousted, the Bulgarians elected another German, Ferdinand of Coburg, as their Prince. The consequent complications, especially the Serbo-Bulgarian war of 1886, brough about the danger of a further increase in Austrian influence in the Balkans. Russian frustration and jealousy was directed against Bismarck's Germany. The Dreikaiserbund crumbled. The Reinsurance Treaty of 1887 only papered over the cracks in the relations of Russia and Germany, especially as there was much bickering on financial and commercial questions. As a forerunner of the future political convergence, the Russian ministry of finance turned to the Paris market in its search for loans. The French, for their part, had been isolated by Bismarck's policy since 1871. They had also twice felt threatened with war, in 1875 and again in 1886-1887, although the danger 11 most probably existed only in their imagination. Nor were the French able to forget that they had lost their position as the principal great power to Germany; neither were they able to forgive the loss of the two provinces. In 1879-1882 a Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria and Italy was formed. Neither Russia nor France alone was strong enough to wage war against the Triple Alliance. The French general staff estimated the military forces of these powers as follows:

infantry cavalry divisions divisions cannons effectives Germany 73 9 3564 1550 000 Italy 22 2 1092 360 000 Austria 42 8 1776 900 000 the Triple Alliance 2810 000 France 75 7 3870 1550 000 Russia 66 20 3290 1600 000 the projected Dual Alliance 3150 0008

Thus together, France and Russia seemed to be stronger than the Triple Alliance. It was not easy to reach an understanding, however. There was the ideological, political and psychological difference between the tsarist autocracy and the atheist republic. The political aims of the two states were also somewhat divergent. The French soldiers hoped for military co-operation against Germany, and the French chauvinists dreamed of Russian support for the revanche. Katkov and other influential Panslavists spurred Alexander III on to approach the French. But Katkov was a dangerous man, because "he has only one dream, to launch France against Germany at her own risk and peril, in order to be free to act in the Balkans. The high command of the Russian army is afraid of Germany but sees an eventual conflict with Austria under very seducing colours. That is why Ignat'ev, ernjaev, Skobelev, Aksakov and others incite the French to revanche".9 The Emperor Alexander III was cautious enough to resist the

8 "Note" s.d., AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 30, p. 196— "Au sujet du role probable de la Russie en cas de conflit entre la France et l'Allemagne", Moulin to war minister 23.VI 1887. EMATHS 7 N 1471.

12 pressure of Russian as well as of French chauvinists, in spite of his own resentment against Germany. For instance, during the dangerous year of 1887 the French understood that they could not expect any other help from Russia except good offices in case of an unprovoked German attack.10 Alexander decided to proceed only after William II's "new men" got the Kaiser to renounce the Reinsurance Treaty in 1890. In the same year the naval might of England seemed to be added to the strength of the Triple Alliance. Already in 1887 the treaty confirming the Mediterranean status quo had been signed between England, Italy, and Austria. This had been Bismarck's counterstroke to Russia's plans in the Near East. And now in 1890 the agreement on the exchange of Zanzibar and Heligoland had the appearance of sealing the Anglo- German entente. Russia's traditional enemy was joining her new adversary. Discussions were started between French and Russian representatives. The result was an exchange of letters on 22.VIII 1891 between Ribot, the French minister for foreign affairs, and Mohrenheim, the Russian ambassador. They declared their identical aim of preserving peace, and promised to help each other in case of an attack by the Triple Alliance. The French wanted to limit the agreemet to Europe, because they did not wish to be drawn into a war against England in consequence of an eventual Russo-English conflict somewhere in Afghanistan or China." The chiefs of the French and Russian general staffs were then authorized to continue their discussions on the details of the military co-operation in case of war.12 — The diplomatic and military discussions were kept secret, but the new orientation was demonstrated with a French naval visit to Kronstadt. And in 1893 admiral Avellan's squadron was received in Toulon with acclaim."

10 = 9 11 MAE to Russian Ambassador 27. VIII 1891. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 30 Note secrete pour le ministre 1.X 1896. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 32. '-Z Freycinet, minister of war, to Ribot 9. VIII 1891. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 30 13 A recent study of the diplomatic prehistory of the Dual Alliance is given by George F. Kennan, The Decline of Bismarck's European Order. Franco-Rus- sian Relations, 1875-1890. Princeton University Press 1979 A classic of undiminished value is Baron Boris Nolde, L'alliance franco-rus- se. Les origines du systeme diplomatique d'avant-guerre. Institut d'etudes slaves de l'universite de Paris, Collection historique VII Paris 1936 13 2.2. The Military Convention

The military discussions were started in 1890 parallel with the diplomatic talks which led to the exchange of letters forming the basis of the alliance. Generals Obrueev and Boisdeffre, the Russian and French chiefs of staff, had been in private contact for many years and had striven for the alliance. Now they informed each other of their respective plans for a war against Germany. Obrucev stated that if the Germans attacked France with the bulk of their army — at least 2/3 of their forces — Russia could attack Germany from Poland. If 2/3 of the Germans should turn to the east, Russia would be compelled to resort to defence with delaying tactics. Gurko, the commander-in-chief in Poland, would draw his forces to Brest(-Litovsk), leaving 100 000 men to delay the German advance by destroying all railway lines, towns, and villages. Obrucev suggested that the French should retire behind their border fortifications and let the German attack break up against them. But whatever the Germans did and whatever the French suffered, Russia was going to throw her principal forces against Austria. It was an absolute necessity to finish off Austria as soon as possible. She would grow in strength if given time, but if Russia attacked her at the very beginning, she would collapse, because her Slav peoples would not fight against Russia. Then Germany would be left alone against Russia and France. This cannot have been very comforting to Boisdeffre, but he was not able to make Obrucev change these plans. But he "understood" that Alexander III would not repeat Alexander II's "mistake" in 1870. "The Emperor knew" that the consequences would be grave also to Russia if France were to be destroyed. The agreed basis of military co-operation was that a German attack against France would be answered with Russian mobilization.' Next summer the discussions were continued. The French general proposed that the convention be made against the Triple Alliance, not only against Germany, lest she should wait

} Boisdeffre to Freycinet 15/20 VIII 1890: AMAE C.P. Russie N.S. 30. DDF VIII/1 n:o 165 14 until France was exhausted by a campaign against Italy and then intervene and dictate the peace. ObruLev agreed, of course, because Austria was for Russia of even more importance than Italy for France. We shall see later how France tried to get out of her obligations in respect of an Austro-Russian war. At this point, however, it was agreed that any act of aggression by the Triple Alliance was to be answered by an immediate mobilization in France and Russia, and the war was to be started on the first day of the mobilization. Obrueev said that he was planning for the launching of the Russian cavalry over the frontier to delay the mobilization and concentration of the enemy. Boisdeffre tried again to make Obr&ev change his mind about the primacy of Austria. The French general explained that the principal enemy, the most dangerous enemy, had to be defeated first. It would be dangerous if Russia attacked Austria or if France attacked Italy first. The secondary enemies could easily be defeated after Germany was beaten. But Obrueev could not admit this point of view. He saw no symmetry between Italy and Austria as enemies. It was of the utmost necessity for Russia to destroy Austria and dissolve her empire. This led the discussion to eventual war aims. Obrueev said that Russia wanted to liberate her brother Slays in Galicia. They were oppressed by the Austrian Poles, who also fomented discontent in the (Russian) Kingdom of Poland. Russia also needed the outlet of the Turkish Straits in order not to be left hemmed in the Black Sea, with all her seaports at the mercy of the English fleet. But Obrucev did not want Constantinople (in the 1915 treaty it was to be made an international city) nor any other conquests; Russia was already too extensive without them. For the Russian general it was "self-evident" that France wanted Alsace and Lorraine back. But it was better to defeat Germany before discussing advancing the French frontier to the Rhine, or the dismembering of the German empire. Boisdeffre did not say much about these questions, at least in his report. The French general staff was very much subordinate to the civilian government. Neither had Obrucev any authority to discuss grand political designs. But the Russian army and its leaders were subordinate only to the emperor, not to any government; and they were not known for any modesty in their 15 appetite for conquest. Of course, Obruäev aired his general ideas and had no definite plans of action. But his discussion reflected the main features of the war aims that Russia strove for in 1914-1917. The generals agreed that neither party wanted to start a war. If a convention was to be made, it must be a defensive convention. But both were ready to wage a war if compelled to do so.15 It is idle to discuss whether the alliance was defensive or offensive; these generals were no pacifists, nor, for that matter, was the emperor. The alliance was defensive as far as both parties were afraid of a German attack and wanted reciprocal support against it. And neither was willing to be dragged into a war under unfavourable conditions, nor to bear the odium of declaring war. But if a war had to be waged, it was better to win it, and to get some advantage out of it: the satisfaction of grievances, conquests, power, the permanent weakening of the enemy. The problem of deciding whether a war is offensive or defensive is more of a political or propagandist question than a historical one. The preamble of the convention thus declared: "France and Russia, animated with a desire to conserve peace, have composed the present note exclusively with a view of a defensive war provoked by the forces of the Triple Alliance against one or other or both of these Powers". A principle of complete reciprocity was decided on: if one of the signatories was attacked, the other was to help with all available force. Then there was much discussion on fixing the amount of available force. France was to concentrate practically all her troops against Germany, leaving only 1/6 of them, or 10 divisions, against Italy or in Africa. Thus she would be able to attack Germany with 65 divisions or 1300 000 men. Germany would not be able to transfer any troops from her western frontier to the east against Russia. The French hoped that Russia would adopt an identical

is Boisdeffre to Freycinet 16.VII 1891. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 30. DDDF VIII/ 1, n:o 424

16 policy vis-å-vis Austria and leave only an indispensable minimum of forces against that power. The French general staff estimated that 11 Russian army corps would be enough to fend off the 14 Austrian corps. Thus there would be left 11 corps or 33 divisions or 700 000-800 000 men against Germany, which was enough to defeat the German army with the help of the 65 French divisions. The French admitted the problems of Russian mobilization and concentration: the state of Russia's communications meant that her military measures were much slower than Germany's and slower even than Austria's. But if the Germans saw at the beginning of the war that Russia was going to march, they would be compelled to keep part of their troops on their eastern frontier.16 Obrucev and Vannovskii — the minister of war — received the French proposition "with favour", but they had "a certain tendency to be preoccupied with Austria more than we should wish ...". Obruaev promised that he would organize demonstrations on the German border in order to worry the enemy and thereby prevent her from transferring her forces to the west. Obrueev estimated that the Triple Alliance would attack Russia with 13 Austrian, 3 Italian and 7 German army corps and with reserve troops, which would leave only 12 German and 9 Italian corps against France. He believed it to be of the utmost importance to attack the Austrian troop concentrations in Galicia first. A prompt victory over the Austrians would engender a respectful attitude in the Rumanians; but an even more important aspect was the fact that such a victory would be the precondition for a march on Breslau. That was the only direction of attack which could constitute a vital threat to the German heartland. Any attack further to the north would run into the German fortifications at Königsberg, on the Vistula, or at Posen.11 Boisdeffre admitted feeling assez triste because of Obrueev's tenacity. Now the French would have wanted the convention to be written against Germany only, not the Triple Alliance. The Austro-Russian rivalry was of no interest to them, and they did not like the eventuality of a Russo-Austrian war that might

16 "Note" s.d. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 30, p. 196— 17 "Note" by Moulin 16. VII 1892. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 31

2 — French information on ... 17 involve them in a war against Germany. They dreamed of a convention where "we would remain free if Germany kept the peace". But of course Russia could not accept a convention of this kind. She was afraid lest Austria or Romania started a war, while Germany waited until Russia was exhausted — the argument was identical to the one the French put forward about the Italian danger. On the other hand, this was a rather theoretical view, because it was not very probable that Germany would keep out of an Austro-Russian conflict. Thus the accepted principle that the convention should be directed against the Triple Alliance was not changed. The French, however, had a further problem. They could not be too reassured about Obrucev's demonstrations on the German frontier. They were afraid that these troops might remain inactive observers, leaving the Germans free to concentrate all their troops against France. For a long time Obrucev withstood fixing the number of troops for the operation against Germany, but in the end he yielded to the French insistence and named the number. The French, on their part, promised to attack Germany with all their forces,'$ which was easy, of course, because they had no other choice (as they thought). The discussion was also concerned with innumerable matters of detail, and it was further delayed by the apprehensions of the Russian emperor. He deemed it vitally important to keep the convention secret, lest the Germans immediately attack on learning that they could no longer hope for Russian neutrality in the event of a Franco-German war. The Russians also insisted that any new Schnaebele-affair, questions, in short, of mere amour-propre, would not be provocation enough to be regarded as a casus foederis. Alexander III was also afraid that, far from protecting Russia, the alliance would be an instrument of French revanchism that would drag Russia into war. The instability of French governments also caused much worry to

18 Ribot to Montebello 22.VII 1892. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 31 Boisdeffre to war minister 10.VIII 1892. AMAE C.P. Russie N.S. 31. DDF IX/ 1 n:o 447 MAE to war ministry 12.VIII 1892. AMAE C.P. Russie N.S. 31

18 the emperor.19 The convention was signed by the chiefs of staff in August 1892, but it took more than a year for it to be ratified. Alexander's doubts on French reliability were allayed somewhat by the warm reception of the Russian fleet at Toulon in 1893. But of course the sheer necessity of the convention was the decisive factor. Germany was reported to be increasing her military forces. Thus the military convention was ratified by an exchange of notes between the Russian and French ministers for foreign affairs on 24.XII 1893/4.I.1894. In the convention the participants promised that if France or Russia were attacked by Germany, or by Italy or Austria with German support, Russia/France was to employ all available forces to attack Germany. In the event of the Triple Alliance or one of the powers thereto mobilizing, France and Russia, on receiving the first information of it, and without any further communication, were to mobilize immediately and simultaneously the totality of their forces and to concentrate them as near their borders as possible. France was to attack Germany with 1300 000 men, and Russia with 700 000 or 800 000 men. These troops were to engage the Germans in full force in order to compel them to fight simultaneously in the east and in the west. It was further agreed that the general staffs of the contracting powers were to concert their efforts to prepare for the execution of the agreed measures. They were to exchange with each other all available information on the armies of the Triple Alliance. The ways and means of war-time communication were to be studied. It was agreed to keep the convention secret, as the emperor had insisted. It was to remain in operation as long as the Triple Alliance lasted. If the war broke out, neither party to the convention was to sign a separate peace.

If the Austro-German Alliance of 1879 had been the first definite act in the formation of the alliances of the great war, the Franco-Russian agreement was the second step in the

19 Boisdeffre to war minister 18.VIII 1892. AMAE C.P. Russie N.S. 31. DDF IX/ 1, n:o 461 19 polarization of European powers. It remained one of the basic factors of European politics for twenty years. But it influenced international and internal politics in many different ways, and it was only after many twists and turns that the articles put on paper in 1894 were transformed into the bloody reality of 1914. At the moment of the signing of the military convention, Matton, a young French officer of the general staff, was on a mission to Russia. His report is of considerable interest, because it throws light on some of the ideas behind the convention. He estimated that the defensive alliance with Russia was useful, but an offensive alliance would have been a mistake. Russia was too slow and too much inclined to the defensive, and it would not have been advantageous for France to declare war on the Triple Alliance or to let Russia drag her into an unequal battle. But the international situation remained intolerable. The incessant formidable armaments race was inevitably leading to war. There was no sense for France to remain waiting for a war which might break out while conditions were unfavourable for her, with an ally who might endanger only a few provinces while France's very existence was in question. It was better to provoke events than to submit to them. France had better work for the disintegration of the Triple Alliance, profiting from its numerous elements of discord. Then, without hesitation, Russia was to be pushed to declare war on Germany, which would be easy because of their tense relations. A war between Russia and Germany was all to the advantage of France. Diplomacy, the art of deceiving dexterously, could serve here by making Russia beautiful promises of effective support, and at the same time promising Germany France's neutrality at the price of some compensation. Then, her troops mobilized and concentrated, France could intervene at a propitious moment and dictate her conditions both to Gernfany and to Russia. It was an undeniable fact that Russia, France's present ally, would be her enemy one day in the future, when Germany was beaten. Russia was presently the enemy of Germany, but would always be the enemy of any power that prevented her from acquiring supremacy in Europe.20

20 Mission en Russie du Cm. Matton, "Memoire sur la Russie" 29.XII 1892. EMATSH 7 N 1484 20 Matton's refreshingly Macchiavellian report reflects his personal way of thinking, of course, and it is no evidence of official French planning. It is, however, a useful reminder that nations alliees are not always so very amies. Allied powers do not become one power; they pursue their own aims and they are in concert only as far as it suits them. The report shows how raison d'état was cheerfully accepted as the moral yardstick in international relations, and how war was held to be both inevitable and acceptable. Of course, in itself the report did not have any practical, immediate importance.

2.3. The Russian Army by the End of the Eighties

Up to and during Alexander II's time the Russian army was recruited from serfs who served for 25 years. There was a motley of establishments, units and high commands, united often only through the sovereign as the supreme warlord. D.A. Miljutin, however, reformed the army during his tenure of office as war minister from 1861 to 1881. The various military services and installations were combined into military districts, with an over-all peacetime command centred in the war ministry. Some commanders of military districts were also charged with civil administration as governor-generals. In the frontier districts (Vilna, Warsaw, Kiev, Caucasia) these commanders were designated wartime army commanders. Miljutin tried, in addition, to improve the educational and professional level of his army, and military discipline was made more reasonable. Compulsory national service was introduced in 1874, with a service period of six years, gradually shortened to three years in the infantry and four years in other branches of the army, with five years in the navy. After active service the men were transferred to the reserve for 13-15 years, and then up to the age of 43 they were enrolled in the militia, which also included the numerous men freed from active service. Men with 21 education could serve for a couple of years and become reserve officers.

The annual contingent of conscripts 1870 140,000 1880 235,000 1890 250,000

Thus, by 1889, the peacetime army consisted of nearly a million men, with three million trained reservists and a few million untrained militia. The number of men in the age classes of military service was 13,160,000 or 11,65 % of a population of 113 million.'' Active troops were organized into army corps, of which there existed eighteen by 1887, with two further added in 1888. Their distribution in the military districts can be seen in map 1. The Guards, Grenadier and Caucasian corps consisted of three infantry divisions each, the army corps I — XVII of two divisions each. Two cavalry divisions were attached to the Guards and Caucasian corps, 14 of the rest had one cavalry division each. In addition there were three detached infantry divisions (of which one in Finland) and four of cavalry; in all 48 infantry divisions and 22 cavalry divisions. There was a brigade of artillery for each infantry division, and a battalion of engineers for each corps. Four rifle brigades formed a light infantry." Then there were the cadre formations for reserve, militia and fortress troops, various local detachments, military schools, installations, services, administrations. Frontier guards were under the ministry of finance, and a corps of gendarmes was under the ministry of the interior. The Asiatic nomads were freed from military service. The Caucasian Mohammedans were subject to

21 "Mobilisation 1892". EMATSH 7 N 1508 (a collection of numerical informa- tion on the Russian army. Tallies sufferably well with Beskrovnyi's and Zaion&kovskii's statistics). All statistics in these reports must be taken with a great deal of scepticism. From report to report there is much variation, which may be due either to the unreliability of the informants or the diffi- culties in compiling the basic data. 22 = 21

22 military service in principle, but in practice they paid a temporary military tax instead. There were a few voluntary national units. The Crimean Tartars formed six squadrons, the Dagestani had a cavalry regiment and three militia sotnias, the Ossets two sotnias. The Turkmen irregular cavalry consisted of three squadrons. The protectorate of Bukhara had a small army of its own." The Finns were freed from military service in 1809, but the autonomous Finnish government formed a few enlisted battalions in the years 1812- 1830. After that only one rifle battalion, part of the Guards corps, remained. The ancient Swedish territorial military system, the indelta, was replaced by modern national service in 1878. Miljutin had hoped that Finns would serve on an equal footing with other Imperial subjects, in the interest of military uniformity and Russification. But Finland succeeded in organizing a tiny army of nine battalions and one dragoon regiment of its own, charged with the defence of Finland and only in this way participating in the military effort of the empire. The Cossacks continued their lifelong service. Each cavalry division consisted of one Cossack regiment in addition to the three regular cavalry regiments. Further Cossack detachments served along the wild Asian frontiers.

Starting a war in the good old days before universal military conscription was a leisurely affair and did not cause much prior staff work. But for the modern war millions of reservists had to be called up and armed, the detachments had to be mobilized and transported to the frontier; and everything had to be done faster than the enemy was doing it. Therefore general staffs had to be established to undertake the task of planning mobilization and troop concentration, and sketching out the first battle as a basis for the planning work. Moltke's

23 "Service militaire des musulmans en Russie". A report 23.X 1909. EMATSH 7 N 1536

23 planning was given credit for the Prussian victories in 1864, 1866 and 1870-71. Other armies organized their brain-power on the model of the Prussian Great General Staff. Miljutin made his general staff a department of the war ministry. There was much to do: it had taken six months to mobilize four army corps in 1859 to guard the Austrian border during the Franco-Austrian war in Italy. A bigger army had been mobilized in two and a half months against the Polish rebels in 1863 — not rapidly enough, notwithstanding the increased speed if compared with 1859. In the seventies planning for war was interrupted by a war which had been neither expected nor planned for, but Miljutin succeeded in sending a bigger army — and sending it faster than before — to the Balkan frontier in 1877. But it was not until the eighties that detailed plans were completed." The powers with whom Russia expected to have to fight were Austria and Germany. The French military attaché reported that in 1882 the Russians calculated that they would be ready to fight in about two months, on the 50-70th day after mobilization. This was much slower than the potential enemies. That was why so many corps were positioned close to the frontier. Supported by numerous fortresses they had to wage a defensive war until the whole of the army was concentrated and ready to operate. Maps 2-3 give the positions of the armies as reported by the military attaché in 1882 and 1884, with map 4 by Zaionckovskii for comparison. The details of the plan were adjusted annually. The crisis of 1887 caused the military attaché to send further reports to Paris. A host of 1300 000 men was to be ready to fight on the 13-14th day, and the strength was to be increased to 2000 000 men by the 25-27th day. The principal or central army was to be commanded by General Gurko, the governor- general of Poland. Grand Duke Vladimir, with Bobrikov as his chief of staff, commanded in Vilna the Northern army, with the task of guarding Gurko's flank. A German landing was expected on Courland, and that was why Vladimir's army was comparatively strong, with one corps at Riga. The capital and the coast of the Gulf of Finland were guarded by one corps. The commander of the Southern army was not designated, but

24 P. ZalondkOVSkil, Voennye reformy p. 79—, 280-

24 General Dragomirov was subsequently appointed commander of the Kiev Military district. This army had the task of securing Gurko's left flank against the Austrians. One army corps was to defend the Black Sea coast. The several armies consisted of the following corps:

Northern army II, III, IV, IX, X Principal army V, VI, XIII, XIV, Guards Southern army VIII, XI, XII, Grenadiers Reserve at Orel XV Gulf of Finland I Black Sea VII The first army corps consisted of three divisions: 23rd in Estonia, 37th in St. Petersburg and Kronstadt, 24th with the Finnish rifle battalions on the northern coast of the Gulf.25 Two further army corps were added to the strength of the Russian army in 1888. Consequently, the field armies were strengthened, with their centre of gravity moved northwards or southwards, according to whether the war was to be waged against Austria, or Germany, or both. The reserves were positioned behind the most important frontiers in White Russia or the Ukraine.

Potential Germany and Germany Austria enemies Austria Russian Russian army armies corps

Northern II, III, IV, XVI II, III, IV, XV, XVI II, III, IV, XVI Grenadiers Central V, VI, XIV, XV V, VI, XI, XIV V, VI, XIV, XV Guards Guards Southern VIII, IX, XI, XII VIII, IX, XII VIII, IX, XI, XII Grenadiers Guards Reserve X, XIII, XVII X, XIII, XVII X, XIII, XVII, Grenadiers Baltic coast I I Black Sea VII VII VII 26

25 Moulin to war minister 9.VI 1887, 24.II 1887, 25.XI 1887. EMATSH 7 N 1471 26 Moulin to war minister 7.VI 1888, 10.X 1889. EMATSH 7 N 1471 25 In this plan the Finnish rifle battalions formed part of the reserve at Kursk, Minsk or Gomel, according to whether both Germany and Austria, or only Germany or Austria were the enemy. — Taking the Finnish conscripted battalions outside the Grand Duchy would have been against the 1878 Finnish law of military service. Had the Finns known of these Russian plans the constitutional crisis of 1899 might have broken out ten years earlier. The French military attaché did not notice this question. It is not known whether the Russian general staff was aware of the constitutional aspect of this detail of their plans. It was a couple of years later, in 1891, that the emperor ordered the revision of the Finnish military organization, which took place in 1901.

The wartime strength of a division was about 20 000 men in the infantry and 8000 in the cavalry. Thus an army corps consisted of 40 000-70 000 men. Nearly two million reservists were to be called up in the first round to fill up the active units and to form the reserve divisions. After that there remained the second call-up of the elderly reservists, about half a million men, and the first call-up of the militia, circa two million men. The untrained militia was to be conscripted only in extreme danger to defend the country.' There seemed to be no lack of men. The problem was to get them to the battle area in time. That was difficult because of the size of the empire and her sparse net of communications. There were only a few railway lines leading to the western frontier from the interior of the country. The main lines and the army corps to be transported are indicated on map 5. The French military attaché Moulin also studied the reason for leaving comparatively strong units out of the main armies to guard the Baltic region. The Russian Baltic fleet was clearly inferior to the German fleet. It was not able seriously to menace the German coasts, nor was it able to defend Russia's

27 "Au sujet du nouveau plan de mobilisation 14". Moulin 29.V 1890. EMATSH 7 N 1472

26 own coasts, neither against a small violation nor against a serious disembarkation. There was no promise of improvement for some years to come. The German coasts were well fortified and thus Germany needed only a small number of second-rank troops for coastal defence. The Russian coasts, on the contrary, were open from Memel to Narva and exposed to violations, as was the Finnish coast outside the fortress of Sveaborg. Kronstadt was well armed, and its approaches were narrow and well protected with mine barrages and small torpedo boats. This fortress protected St. Petersburg and the bottom of the Gulf. The nearest point to the capital open for an disembarkation was Krasnye Gorki between Oranienbaum and Narva. However, the coast was unapproachable for part of the year because of ice. The only area where the sea never froze was between Memel and Vindava; in the Gulf of Riga the sea froze only for a short time. Therefore the Germans had their best chance on the Courland coasts. In addition there were railway lines available there, and the local population was well disposed towards the Germans. The defence works were nothing to speak of. Dünamünde was a dilapidated fort. Until Libau was completed — started in 1890, "it will take ten years at the pace the Russians construct their forts" — the Russian general staff had reason to be apprehensive of a German landing on Courland. A landing force of 30 000-40 000 men was to be expected. Therefore it was necessary to have an equal number of Russian troops in these regions. The rest of the coast could be protected by a strong mobile division supported by the Sveaborg and Kronstadt garrisons, depot troops, second-line reserve detachments, and the militia. There was an additional explanation for retaining so many troops behind the frontier. A number of army corps had to be left out of the original troop concentration because of the inadequacy of the railway network. Afterwards they could be sent to one or another theatre of war according to the circumstances. This reserve army could also be said to include the corps left on the coast, "if a position so dispersed can be so called".28 Later Moulin had further detailed information on the 24th division in Finland and the 23rd division in Reval being sent to the frontier: "The state of the railways doesn't allow the 27 transport of these divisions to the army of Vilna or Warsaw until a latish date, towards the 50th day".79 i The 24th division was later taken out of Finland to form part of the new XVIII army corps in Estonia. A new rifle brigade was created to replace it, because it was deemed too dangerous for Russian prestige in Finland to leave only reserve formations and the Finnish battalions in the Grand Duchy.

2.4. The Russian Ally Evalued in 1892

Matton, whom we met above, was, among other tasks, charged with making an evaluation of the military importance of France's new ally. He reported that as a rule the Russians liked France and detested Austria and Germany, who were interfering with Russian interests in every way. — This was obvious enough since it was the reason why Russia had concluded the alliance, in the first place. The Russian soldier Matton regarded as generally well-built, but of limited intelligence; absolutely obedient, but without initiative and individuality. The Russian officer had often only an indifferent education and rarely liked working, "carelessness being a trait of the Slav character". The Guards officer had plenty of wealth but little knowledge; he was brilliant in salons and bars, but dissipated and a gambler; his bravery could not be doubted but his skill could not be trusted. The studies in the general staff academy were better organized than in France. The three arms were able to act in liaison and had a common tactical doctrine. Otherwise everything else was retarded in the Russian army; the wheels

28 Moulin to war minister 5.VII 1890. EMATSH 7 N 1472 29 Moulin to war minister 1.VII 1890. EMATSH 7 N 1472

28 were badly greased. Promotion was rarely decided on merit, nearly always on favour. The Russians were a people who did not wish anything better than to wage war, but their natural nonchalance prevented them from taking pains in the preparations for it. The materiel of the first line seemed to be complete and well maintained. But the infantry rifle was still in the course of being replaced with a new model; and Russia was surely to be one of the last great powers to adopt the modern cannon." At this time several other French officers visited Russia to get acquainted with the new ally. Their reports are often stereotyped, but nevertheless they include plenty of information. Several studies on the Russian army were made on the basis of these reports and other available information. A typical example, and one commended by his superior officers, was compiled by Captain Paul Dreyfus.31 He stated that the Russian soldier had been distinguished for his endurance during the painful expedition in the Balkans, and his heroism at Plevna was well remembered. He was not the automaton the German soldier was, forged by the Prussian dressage. On the contrary the Russian soldier was treated by his officers with a certain benevolence, which contrasted well with the sharpness of the Prussian officers. Recruiting non-commissioned officers, Dreyfus went on, was difficult, because there were no middle classes in Russia. The cream of officers was educated in the Corps of Pages, in the cadet schools, and in the military schools. The great majority of officers were produced in the junker schools. After serving six years in the ranks even a private could be sent to a junker school and then promoted officer; but such officers were never appointed to vacancies in the west. The instruction in the Nicholaean Academy of the General Staff was brilliant and up to date, but the officers were kept under a pedantic discipline,

30 Mission en Russie du Cm. Matton. "Memoire sur la Russie". 29.XII 1892. EMATSH 7 N 1484 31 Travail d'etude du capitaine Paul Dreyfus de 1'Etat-Major de la 32e Division en 1896. EMATSH 7 N 1484. Paul Dreyfus was not THE Dreyfus, who was Alfred, nor his brother, who was Mathieu

29 and they remained strangers to the troops. The general level of education of officers was inferior to the corresponding French level. Seniority was the principal ground for promoting officers. The author noted with special interest the teaching of tactics by General Dragomirov, commander of the Kiev military district. He was designated commander-in-chief of the Southern or South-Western army, which had to attack the Austrians at the very beginning of the war. This general stressed the virtues of assault over firing: "pula dura, styk molodec" (bullet is stupid, bayonet is plucky; Suvorov seems to have taught this doctrine). Only the cold weapon was able to give decisive results, while firing from a distance corresponded too well with the instinct of personal safety. — This was to be a costly way of thinking in 1914. Dreyfus believed that the Russian army might have been very powerful if it had been organized in the German fashion, utilizing to the maximum effect the total male population. Perhaps this would be done later, thought Dreyfus, when the alliance with France had encouraged Russia decide to wrench from Germany the European hegemony, which the latter had won twenty years earlier with her victories. — The passage indicates a lack of understanding of the importance of social, economic and industrial factors in war and military organization. It was customary then to take into account only the standing peacetime military strength of a country, because only a short, decisive campaign was expected. — However, even at that the current Russian army was stronger than its German opponent:

Russian and German mi itary power compared, 1892 Russia Germany population, million 119 49 regiments 193 173 squadrons 346 465 batteries 435 494 fortress companies 229 149 sapper companies 97 128 officers 33 829 28 853 men 858 948 569 764 horses 143 964 96 844 30 Of reserve troops there were 28 regiments in European Russia, 8 regiments in Caucasia and nine battalions in Asia. The fifth company in each reserve battalion was intended to form the cadre of a second call-up reserve regiment. The difficulties in Russian troop mobilization and concentration were due to the size of the empire. European Russia was ten times the size of France, and Asiatic Russia extended to 16 million square kilometres. This made simultaneous action with France nearly impossible. It was true that a great part of Russia's forces were garrisoned near her western frontier: 25 infantry divisions and 13 cavalry divisions in the military districts of Warsaw. Vilna an Kiev, plus 17 infantry and 5 cavalry division in the St. Petersburg, Moscow and Odessa districts. But even this area was six times bigger than France. Troop concentration was slow because of the defects of the railway network: the small number of strategic lines, the lack of double track, the sparse network. Germany would be ready to attack on the eight day, while twelve Austrian corps would be mobilized and ready to march on the twenty-fourth day. Thus Russia could not help adopting a defensive attitude during the first weeks of the war. Strong fortifications were being constructed near the border, and the army corps of the Warsaw, Vilna, and Kiev districts constituted solid covering forces. Dreyfus had the same idea that the Russians toyed with later: perhaps it was preferable for Russia to evacuate Poland and withdraw her troops to the interior of the empire so as to have complete security during mobilization. The captain concluded that the situation was a gloomy one for France. Germany was free to leave only a small number of army corps on her eastern frontier, and France would have to fight the total might of the enemy alone at the beginning of the war. Russia would not be saved, either: after beating France the Germans would be free to transfer their army to the east to make an end of Russia. Therefore it was of stringent necessity for Russia to perfect her means of troop mobilization and concentration and arming so as to compel Germany to dispose at least a half of her army corps on the eastern frontier at the beginning of the war. This was to be the recurring theme in the general staff discussions for two decades. 31 A third officer, Commandant (Major) Chirlonchon, visited the Warsaw military district. He received a favourable impression of the Russian army there. It possessed the essential qualities of a good army: discipline, sobriety, tenacity, and courage. But great problems existed in the frontier areas. Chirlonchon believed that the Polish hatred of Russia could not perhaps be sparked off as easily as in 1863, but nevertheless it was deeply felt. The government had done nothing to rally the population; it only tried to subjugate the Poles through a hard system of oppression. The army did not trust the Poles. A maximum of 4-5 Polish officers was admitted to any regiment, and no Poles at all were accepted in the Guards or on the general staff. Polish recruits were dispersed in far-away regiments. Consequently, the regiments posted in Poland had to be filled up with reservists from the interior of the empire when a mobilization occurred. Also the Jews, of whom there were a great number in Poland, felt a disguised but profound antipathy to Russia.32 The Polish railways were ordered to replace all Polish personnel with Russians by 189333 in spite of protests by Gurko and his railway officer Palicyn. The government explained in an official journal that the great number of Poles employed by the railways constituted a permanent danger because of the strategic importance of the lines traversing the country. "It must not be concluded that the government suspects all Poles, of whom a great number, we willingly acknowledge, have served dutifully for long years; but the government is convinced of the necessity of ensuring the complete security of the lines linking the interior of the empire with its frontiers"." The ability of the Russian government to win over nationalities like Poles was somewhat limited. There were similar problems in Finland and Caucasia, too.

32 "Compte rendu d'un voyage en Russie, execute par monsieur le Command- ant Laurent Chirlonchon en 1893". EMATSH 7 N 1484 33 Ambassador in Petersburg to MAE to war ministry 27.VII 1892. EMATSH 7 N 1480 34 Ambassador in Petersbrug to MAE to war ministry 18.VIII 1892. EMATSH 7 N 1480

32 2 2.5. Troop Mobilization and Concentration in 1890-1897

Matton had also pondered the problems of Russian mobilization. He reckoned that there were about 600 000 men on the western frontier. Active troops from the Moscow and St. Petersburg districts were able to arrive on the fifteenth day, and all mobilized reserves from European Russia would be concentrated by the thirtieth day. Thus Russia would be adopting a defensive attitude in the beginning of the war, wrote Matton, at a time when France would have to fight alone against three powers, or four if England were to join the Triple Alliance, for a month. Germany would certainly concentrate all her might in Lorraine and Alsace, and perhaps she would buy Russia off by compensating her in the Orient.35 This was an additional reason for Matton to propose that Russia should be pushed to start the war. Moulin, the French military attaché, had very good sources of information in the Russian military establishment. He reported that the mobilized strength of the Russian army amounted to nearly three and a half million, with 1 284 000 men in the active troops and 770 000 men in the reserve detachments. The first-line troops amounted to 48 infantry divisions and 28 reserve divisions in Europe.36

36 Mission ... = 30 36 "L'effectif normal de l'arme russe", by Moulin. active troops 898 infantry battalions 1,284,000 men 356 cavalry squadrons 340 artillery batteries 17 sapper battalions 8 pontoon battalions 6 railway battalions 18 fortress artillery battalions 6 gendarme squadrons 28 frontier guard brigades reserve troops 430 infantry battalions, I call-up 770,000 men 248 infantry battalions, II call-up 152 artillery batteries 20 engineer companies 3 railway battalions depot troops 200 battalions 255,000 men

3 — French information on ... 33

How these forces were to be deployed was explained by Obrucev to Boisdeffre during their discussion in 1891. Obrucev expected an attack by four German active corps and two reserve corps from East Prussia towards the Niemen and Vilna with the objective of confusing the Russian mobilization and preventing the Petersburg troops from arriving in Poland. Three more corps were expected to come from Posen to engage Gurko in Poland. The Austrians were at this time probably directing five corps from Cracow towards Warsaw, five corps from Przemysl and three or four corps from Lemberg to the north-east. Thus there would be 900 000 men attacking Poland, but Obrucev expected Gurko to be able to stem them with his 300 000 men supported by the Vistula fortresses until he was strengthened by the Moscow and Petersburg garrisons. The Niemen or northern army would confuse the German mobilization by cavalry attacks and defend the Niemen line, thus enabling the transport of the Petersburg troops towards Poland to take place. Dragomirov with his southern army would attack the Austrian communications in order to check their offensive. After collecting all his forces and stopping the enemy advances on his flanks Gurko could start his offensive against Breslau and Berlin." By the end of 1891 the right flank, the Niemen army, had been somewhat strengthened. It had the task of invading East Prussia in order to align with Gurko's front and threby to eliminate the threat against his right flank. This direction was

36 Continued local troops 30 fortress infantry regiments 235,000 men 53 fortress artillery batteries 10 fortress artillery companies 16 sortie batteries Cossack troops 877 sotnias included in active 40 batteries and reserve 20.5 battalions effectives militia troops 320 battalions, I call-up 660,000 men 320 battalions, II call-up Troops in Caucasia 70,000 men Troops in Asia 65,000 men "Mobilisation 1892", EMATSH 7 N 1508 37 Boisdeffre to war minister iO.VIII 1892. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 31. DDF IX/ 1 n:o 447 34

deemed the most dangerous for the main army, and consequently it was felt to be the most probable direction of German attack. But in spite of the acknowledged need to reinforce the northern flank, the Russian general staff did not renounce their plan of an offensive against Austria. They considered that until the Austrian army had been chased behind the Carpathians, it was impossible to expose Gurko's left flank to them by an attack towards Posen, or to leave them behind the Russian back if Gurko's front was turned northwards to the Narew. Southern Poland had no natural barriers, and no first-class fortresses excepting Ivangorod, and therefore it was impossible to leave the Austrians the chance of a victory which would let them to the communications of the Russian army. The Russian general staff also calculated that defensive action against the Austrians needed as many troops as offensive action, and offered less advantage. The defeat of the Austrian army and the evacuation by them of Galicia remained the inevitable prelude to any invasion of Germany.38 The following year the plan of an offensive against Austria emerged even more clearly when the main army was divided into two groups. The army of the Vistula stood against the Germans with six army corps. The southern army of the Bug faced south-west, i.e. faced the Austrians, with three corps.39 The French were somewhat doubtful of the chances of a Russian success. They calculated that the southern offensive against the Austrians could not start before the thirty-fifth day, when the Austrians advancing from Przemysl would have already thrown the Russians back towards Brest.40 But they were not able to make Obru6ev change his plans. The four armies can be marked out on the map (map 6) given to General Boisdeffre during the discussions on the military convention. This compares rather well with the map (map 7) drawn by Zaionekovski.

The Numerical Strength of Russian Armies in 1891 1. Warsaw military district Army of the Vistula 249 000 Army of the Bug 160 000

38 Moulin to war minister 28.X 1891. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 30 39 Moulin to war minister 8.I11 1892. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 30 40 "Historique de la concentration russe 1882-1902". EMATSH 7 N 1509 35

698 000 men reserve 123 000 garrisons 156 000 2. Vilna military district Army of the Niemen 268 000 Detachment of 458 000 men Belostok 98 000 reserve 60 000 garrisons 32 000 3. Kiev military district South-W. army 409 000 467 000 men reserve 58 000 4. Odessa military district Bessarabian corps 54 000 Crimean corps 28 000 100 000 men Chersonesian corps 18 000 1723 000 men in all The Baltic coast detachment 60 000 Amur military district 27 395 Omsk military district 4 222 Irkutsk military district 3 390 Turkestan detachments 28 582 Transcaspian detachments 11 029 Caucasian detachments 85 880

Instead of the earlier general reserve, each army now had a reserve of its own. The detachments in Asia could not be transferred to the west because the Asian borders and recent areas conquered were not entirely pacified.41 A new army corps, the 18th, was organized in Estonia in 1893,42 and the 19th in 1895 in Poland.43 Two more had been planned44 but their formation was adjourned to 1898 (the 20th in the Vilna district) and ad calendas graecas45 (but the latter, the 21st in the Kiev district, was organized by the time the Japanese war broke out). The attached map (map 8) shows the distribution of the army corps in the empire at this time. The general idea of the troop concentration plan remained constant, but there seem to have been notable changes of detail in the annual revisions of the plan. Plan n:o 16 in 1896 mentioned the following points for the concentration of the several army corps:

41 "Effectifs des armees russes' en cas de guerre avec l'Allemagne et l'Autriche", Moulin 17.III 1892. EMATSH 7 N 1472 "Effectifs de 1'armee russe au Caucase et en Asie". Moulin 2.V 1891. EMATSH 7 N 1472 42 Moulin to war minister 5.III 1893. EMATSH 7 N 1473 43 "Formation d'un XIX corps'd'armee russe". Moulin 12.XII 1894. EMATSH 7 N 1480 44 Moulin to war minister 20.VI 1894. EMATSH 7 N 1473 45 Moulin to war minister 12.V 1896. EMATSH 7 N 1474

36 III army corps Vilkovitki II Suvalki Olita XVIII Grodno IV Belostok XVI Belostok V Novo-Aleksandrovsk — Sedlec VI Lomia Guards Sedlec — Belsk XI Luck X Dubno IX Proskurov XII Kamenno-Polock VII Sevastopol VIII Odessa — Kitinev 46 Next year the distribution of army corps in the various armies was given as follows:

The Niemen army II, III, IV, I The Vistula army V, XV, XVI, VI, XVIII The Bug army XIV, XIX, Grenadiers South-W. army VI, XVII, XII, IX, X expeditionary corps VII Bessarabian corps 47 The thirteenth army corps and the Guards corps are not mentioned in the second list, while the Grenadiers are left out of the first one. The Bessarabian corps must be the eighth from Odessa. Moulin writes: "The document covers only the military districts of Vilna, Warsaw, and Kiev and does not contain any information on the defence of the Baltic coast either in Finland or in the military district of St. Petersburg, but I trust that the deuxieme bureau is able to make an approximate reconstruction of those measures".48 For us the reconstruction is a bit problematic, because not many active troops were left in the district of the capital if the first, eighteenth and the Guards corps were transported to the frontier. There remained the eight Finnish and eight Russian rifle battalions in Finland.

76 "Points de concentration du corps d'armee actifs". Moulin 2.VII 1896. EMATSH 7 N 1474 47 Moulin to war minister 29.III 1897. EMATSH 7 N 1474 48 - 47 37 But of course reserve, local, and fortress troops were available. Maps 9 and 10 give the concentration areas of the armies in 1896 and 1897. And here the lost corps are found, the Guards near Warsaw and the thirteenth in the Bug army. The other St. Petersburg corps, first and eighteenth, can be seen forming a centre of gravity on the right flank or behind the main army. — In the 1897 plan the cavalry was grouped together in two cavalry corps, but it seems that no such corps were organized in practice. As far as the French agents knew, the troops in Poland were to defend their positions at the beginning of the war against the Triple Alliance. Only the forces of the Kiev military district, the South-Western army, were to take the offensive. The plan was to have them mobilized on the sixth day and in position on the seventeenth day.49 Thus there was no improvement from the French point of view: "It is from the day when the Russian general staff disposes on the left bank of the Vistula of sufficient force to menace the valley of the Oder that Russia will be able to play a serious part against the Triple Alliance. All other combinations are but half measures and leave her ally in a situation that is full of dangers. If the general staff has not understood this simple concept, it is to be attributed to their policy of extreme appeasement towards Germany, a policy which seems odd in the light of the energy with which Germany reinforces garrisons in Alsace- Lorraine and East Prussia"." There had been, in short, no improvement since the military convention had been signed. On the contrary, Russia was approaching Germany because the Kaiser supported Russia's eastern policy. For a moment, in the years 1895-1897, Russia had her attention turned to the Near East. After that she became even more absorbed in the Far Eastern schemes.

:9 "Notes sur la mobilisation de l'armee Russe". Rapport sur les travaux au 2e bureau de Petat-major de l'armee, par le capitaine Niessel, stagiaire a l'etat- major de 1'armee 1897. EMATSH 7 N 1484 50 Moulin to war minister 12.VI 1897. EMATSH 7 N 1474 38 3. Distractions

3.1. The Near East 1895-1897

Russia had aspired to the possession of the Turkish Straits since the days of Peter and Catherine. She had also learned that the way to the Straits went through the Balkans, where the Orthodox and Slav population demanded Russian protection — at least so the Russians imagined. But experience had also taught the Russians that other powers did not very much care for the idea of Russian Straits. France, England, and Austria had schemes of their own regarding the division of the inheritance of the sick man of Europe. That was why Russia preferred maintaining Turkey as the guardian of the Straits. She was weak enough to respond to a certain degree of Russian influence. And later on might dawn the day when Russia would be strong enough to fulfil her historic mission, the conquest of Constantinople, the Tsargrad. The conquest had been in Russia's programme, but nothing had been done so far to disturb the precarious status quo (since 1878). But then an Armenian mob rebelled in Constantinople in 1895, probably in a futile attempt to provoke the great powers to favour an autonomous or independent Armenia. The Bulgarian massacres of 1875 served as a model. There was the possibility of a British fleet arriving in Constantinople to keep order for the Sultan. The Russian ambassador was afraid of England settling in the Straits and thus making an end of the Russian dreams once and for all. He asked the St. Petersburg government for authority to call up the Black Sea fleet at the first sign of the British approach. 39 Preparations were started, troops mobilized and concentrated in Odessa and Sevastopol. The military attaché did not identify the troops, but there were enough of them to form an army corps. A landing beach was chosen near the Bosphorus, on the European side. (map 11) But the mobilization of the Black Sea fleet at Odessa and Sevastopol was an arduous affair. The navy was found to be in a bad condition for serious action, which was aggravated by the inexperience of the additional officers and sailors sent over from the Baltic fleet to the Black Sea. There were also fewer transport ships than expected. Only four of the ships of the volunteer fleet were equipped for transporting horses and heavy material; the rest were not very useful. Only one division could be carried at one time. The passage was calculated to take ten days if there was no fog or tempest. But by the end of December 1895, when the call for action was expected daily, the time for good weather had already passed.J1 The Caucasian troops were put in a state of readiness. The thirty-ninth division on the Armenian border was mobilized.52 Moulin calculated that because of the eventual opposition of England, Italy, and some other powers, the Russian operation was possible only with Turkish consent. He supposed that a naval Russo-Turkish convention might exist for a joint defence of the Tshadaldsha line; he assumed the Turks would keep Constantinople under control, while the Russians closed the Bosphorus.53 — As far as is known, no such convention existed. But a Russian general, Cicaev, inspected the Turkish defences at the Dardanelles. He had to conclude that they were good for nothing. The works were in a bad condition, there were not enough cannons to cover the passages, and there was a complete lack of organization. The officers charged with the defence were incapable, in particular the personnel of the mine defences was totally incompetent. He estimated that a British fleet would be able to force the passages, probably with losses, but not big enough to deter it.54

5' Moulin to war minister 23.XII 1895. EMATSH 7 N 1473 52 "Preparatifs militaires de Russie". Moulin 26.XI 1895. EMATSH 7 N 1480 53 = 51 54 "L'expedition des Russes sur mer Noire". Moulin 2.XI 1896. EMATSH 7 N 1474 40 The Dual Alliance did not work well in this instance. France was asked for support and help, being the nation amie et alliee. Paris answered that Russia could trust France if the problem was to maintain the status quo in the Straits, as had been agreed in 1856. In case of a peaceful partition of Turkey mutual support was promised: France was interested in Egypt, Suez and Syria. But war must be avoided. "Only a grand national question, like a revision of the peace of Frankfurt, could justify a war in the eyes of the French people".55 Thus France gave no encouragement to the planned coup, in spite of a Russian hint of support for an eventual reconquest of the lost provinces.56 There was also opposition to the expedition in the higher echelons of the Russian army, who saw it as a harmful diversion. Dragomirov, the commander in Kiev, and Puzerevskii, the chief of staff in Warsaw, were among those known to oppose the coup. They considered the idea of an invasion of Turkey most regrettable, because it presented great difficulties in execution, and would probably lead to a general war, under unfavourable conditions for Russia.57 Then in 1897 the Cretan question led to a war between Greece and Turkey. Once more the dissolution of the Sultan's empire seemed to be nigh. Again Russia had to prepare for an intervention, "a great activity reigns at present in Sevastopol".58 British influence was suspected of being behind the Cretan disorders. England was thought to be scheming for a naval base in Suda bay, whence a fleet could easily close the approaches to the Straits. These suspicions gave a renewed impetus to the Russian preparations. A landing force was prepared for the invasion of the Bosphorus. This time the seventh corps in Sevastopol was earmarked for the operation. (Plan n:o 16, mentioned on page

55 "Pourparlers secrets decembre 1895—fevrier 1896. Note secrete pour le mi- nistre". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 32 56 "Note secrete pour le ministre" 2.X 1896. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 32 57 "Au sujet de l'opinion de deux generaux russes sur le projet de descente au Turquie". Moulin 15.XII 1896. EMATSH 7 N 1474 58 Report by the French consul at Odessa 10.II 1897 to military attaché to war minister. EMATSH 7 N 1474 41 38. Map 11 gives a detailed picture of the corps.). The few Russian ships in the Mediterranean were supposed to support the break-through from Saros Island.59 — The report does not explain how they would have eliminated the British Mediterranean fleet. The most effective weapon against England was supposed to be pressure from the Russian Central Asian possessions against the Afghan and Indian borders. These plans will be explained later. Italy was also known to be scheming for influence in the western Balkans, in Montenegro and Serbia. They might have supported the British in the attempt to take Gallipoli.6° An especially keen rival was Austria, of course. She was known to have ambitions on Salonica. But it was hoped that Sofia, Athens, and Belgrade would be able to check these ambitions, if not engaged by the Balkan Muslims and the Turks. The conciliation with Bulgaria since 1894 had been a great step forward for Russia. The general staff was able to count on Bulgarian support for the realization of its plans; and the Bulgarian army was developing promisingly.61 These views of the situation seem somewhat rosy — Italian and Austrian opposition was played down on the strength of Balkan help against them. It causes no surprise to learn that in St. Petersburg Witte was reported to be very much against the projected adventure. On the other hand, influential Pan- Slavists ardently desired the Straits and they were rumoured to be working up the Bulgarians and the Macedonians to force the Russian government to act.62 Happily, for the Russian government, Turkey showed a surprising vitality. The Sultan's troops beat the Greek regiments. Thus the Straits problem could be adjourned. Turkish vitality was also reflected in the attitude of the Balkan populations: "The attitude of Bulgaria and Serbia is resolutely pacific. The military vigour of which Turkey has recently given proof is an important factor in this resolution".63

59 Moulin to navy minister 29.I 1897. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 32 6° Moulin to war minister 23.I 1897. EMATSH 7 N 1474 61 Moulin to war minister 5.II 1897. EMATSH 7 N 1474 62 Moulin to war minister 5.III 1897. EMATSH 7 N 1474 63 Moulin to war minister 13.IV 1897. EMATSH 7 N 1474

42 Austria, too, had her reasons for wishing to preserve the status quo in the Balkans. The Dual Monarchy was preoccupied with the difficulties caused by the quarrelling nationalities of the empire. If there was no immediate danger of the Turkish empire dissolving, Austria and Russia would be able to agree on leaving it alone for the present, in spite of their fundamental rivalry. It was hoped that the Sultan would carry out some reforms in Macedonia to mollify the population, whose dissatisfaction was endangering the peace there. No more military or naval preparations were needed: "For the moment the Russian general staff has no intention of taking any precautionary measures which might arouse Austrian susceptibilites ..."64 When the notorious Pan-Slavist Ignat'ev was appointed ambassador in Constantinople, he explained that the question of the Turkish Straits must always remain a prime one for Russia. But for the moment she had too many interests to safeguard, too much new territory to reorganize, too many internal problems to solve, too many projects in Central Asia and on the frontiers of China, to have any other aim but to maintain the status quo in the Near East."6 Thus the Near Eastern question was not abandoned, but it was frozen for the duration of Russia's grand adventure on the distant Asian frontiers.

The Turkish victory over the Greeks called forth an Islamic revival in the Asian regions that were inhabited by the Mussulmans, in the Turkish as well as in the Russian or English possessions. "In the Asian bazaars they talk only of the splendid triumphs of the Turks"." This was ominous for the colonial empires, but the pan-Islamic or pan-Turkish menace took its time to materialize. The general staffs of the European nations had to bear in mind,

64 Moulin to war minister 29.IV 1897. EMATSH 7 N 1474 65 Rouvier, envoy in Stockholm, to MAE 15.VII 1897. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 16 66 "Reveil de l'islamique en Asie". Moulin 12.XII 1897. EMATSH 7 N 1506 43 however, that their Musulman subjects were not to be trusted completely.

In 1900 the fleet and army in Sevastopol were again mobilized with the aim of preparing an expedition to the Bosphorus. Probably this was not intended to issue in an actual departure to the Straits. The preparations already undertaken in 1896 had been kept up and incorporated in the military organization of the Black Sea region. Now the general staff wanted to see whether they functioned well. Moulin, when reporting on this, also supposed that the intention was to remind the Turks of the respect due to their Russian neighbour.6i But three years later the Sevastopol and Odessa troops were again made ready for the expedition. The volunteer fleet was also assembled and trained for the ferrying of the expeditionary corps. "The preparations are not concealed, but there is no indication of a general mobilization".68 This time there was a material reason for the preparations. In the spring of 1903 the peace of the Balkans was again disturbed by the Macedonian quarrels. European opinion demanded reforms; to avoid England meddling in their sphere of interest Austria and Russia drew up a programme for the Sultan. As previously, they both wished to preserve the status quo. Happily for them, the Sultan accepted the program. But there still remained the danger of him delaying the execution of his promises and consequently of a Bulgarian or other intervention. Therefore Russia had to prepare for an intervention of her own, on the previous model. This time more detail was given on the action planned in Caucasia. Two army corps had been organized there. They were to be mobilized in twelve days and concentrated in Kars in sixteen days. They would consist of 110 000 infantrymen and 25 000 cavalry. The Turks needed more than a month to collect their army on the Caucasian border. Thus the Russians would be able to advance into Armenia. But there a Turkish army of equal strength — 125 000 men — would be waiting for them. Thus no decisive

6' "Exercice de mobilisation a Sebastopol". Moulin 10.III 1900. EMATSH 7 N 1476 68 Moulin to war minister 6.III 1903. EMATSH 7 N 1476 44 results could be expected from the Caucasian theatre. The Black Sea fleet consisted of 8 battleships, 2 coastal armoured ships, 3 protected cruisers, 6 gunboats, 3 torpedo cruisers and 32 torpedo boats. There were 5 naval transports and 17 ships of the volunteer fleet. The Russian Navigation Company had 20 ships, but at any time half of its ships were in service in Palestine, Alexandria, and the Far East. Thus there were 32 ships available, capable of transporting 30 000 men with 4-5 artillery batteries at one time. Odessa military district had prepared the seventh and eighth army corps for transshipment. But only one corps could be embarked at one time, on the eleventh day. The rest of the troops could follow later, or march through Romania. For the expected action there were a few alternative plans. Russia might try to break through the Bosphorus and to occupy Constantinople. The breakthrough was possible because of the state of the defence works on the Bosphorus. But there were 25 000 men of the Sultan's guard in the capital, and 90 000 more men could mobilized by the tenth day in Asia Minor. And the English fleet could cause serious difficulties for the expedition. A landing between Burgas and Constantinople was also possible. The seventh corps would be able to execute it on the twelfth day. Turkey would be able to mobilize 35 000-100 000 men in Thrace between twelve to sixty days, and thus the Turkish corps in front of the seventh corps would be a superior force, constituting 38 000 men by the twelfth day. But a Russian landing could be massively supported by the Bulgarian army. The latter would have 120 battalions or 120 000 men mobilized and concentrated on the Thracian frontier, in addition to the 24 battalions helping the rebellion in Macedonia. These 120 battalions would advance from the valley of Maritza against the Turkish flank. A landing further to the north, between Burgas and Varna, would be easy, on the eleventh day. But there the Russians would be only an additional corps to the Bulgarian army facing the Turkish border. The eighth army corps of 80 000 men would need three transports of four days each. Thus it would not be until the twenty-third day that the Russians would have their 110 000 men concentrated. Then, with the Bulgarians they would add up to an army of 250 000 men. By the twenty- 45 third day the Turks would be able to have only 50 000 men concentrated. A march through Romania would bring the eighth corps to the theatre of war on the thirty-seventh day, on condition that Romania and Europe consented to it. The problematic breakthrough at the Bosphorus and the landing of the seventh corps might lead to some results if the action was supported by the eighth corps in Thrace. (Evidently, the eighth corps was to prevent the Turks from concentrating against the landing corps). In Macedonia Turkey had 110 000 men. They could be mobilized between ten to twelve days. They would then be engaged in fighting the Macedonian rebels and the 24 Bulgarian battalions, starting from the twelfth day. The rebellion would be supported also by Montenegro, who was able to mobilize 20 000 men instantaneously and to concentrate them on the Albanian border by the fifth or sixth day. Serbian and Greek action could be ignored. Serbia was able to mobilize and concentrate 80 000 men in three weeks, but preparations for an offensive would take another three weeks. Greece had 2-3 divisions, i.e. 20 000-25 000 men, but their mobilization had not been prepared. Consequently a great confusion would follow from a declaration of a war. Thus the Greeks were not able effectively to help any of the belligerents.B9 Then, after all, there was no great revolt in Macedonia, and consequently no Russian intervention. The calculations outlined above remained only as an example of staff paper work. In the French report it was not indicated how much of the projected plan was based on actual Russian information, and how much was conjecture by the military attaché and the general staff in Paris. But the plan illustrates the general tendency of the general staffs to expect the decision of a campaing in one great battle at the very beginning and the consequent importance of speed in troop mobilization and concentration. — No thought was given to an intervention by any other great power, excepting the possible action of the British fleet.

69 "Note au sujet d'une intervention armee eventuelle de la Russie et des Etats balkaniques dans les affaires macedonniennes". Etat-major de l'armee, avril 1903. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 36, p. 197-

46 Russia and Austria succeeded in renewing their agreement on the Balkan status quo in 1903. Thus Russia was able to pursue her distractions elsewhere, for a while.

3.2. New Commanders

There was no age limit for Russian generals. One of the cardinal weak points of the Russian army was the high age of the commanders. For instance, the minister of war Vannovskii was enfeebled and was deemed to be "only a machine for signing papers". (But he was not too old to be appointed minister of education after he left the war ministry). General Obrucev was also very feeble and his faculties were badly diminished. In Poland the successor of the late Gurko, count Suvalov, was not satisfactory either in health or ability. In Kiev Dragomirov had begun to sink visibly. Mussin-Pus"kin in Odessa was a drunkard whose character had softened. eremetev in Caucasia was in deplorable health and incapable of war-time command.70 — This unadorned list was drawn up by Moulin in 1896, probably inspired by younger generals who aspired to replace the old crew. One of the measures which the Soviet historians call counter- reforms was the planned remodelling of the army command after the German model. The war minister was to answer only for administration, while a general inspector of the army — Dragomirov's name was mentioned — was to take care of training. Operational questions were to be dealt with by the chief of the general staff — Obrucev, Kuropatkin, Puzerevskii, and Bobrikov were among the candidates — immediately subordinate to the emperor. This system would have emphasized the position of the emperor as the supreme war- lord, if he had been the man for such a task, which Nicholas II evidently was not. The system had worked to some extent under an amateur military emperor like Alexander I, but the

70 Moulin to war minister 15.I 1896. EMATSH 7 N 1474 47 confusion it caused was one of the reasons for the disaster of 1853-1856. The system did not work very well in Germany, either, where William II was unable to direct the various conflicting chancelleries, ministries, and staffs. One of Miljutin's principal reforms had been to unite all command in the war ministry. Now a supreme committee was appointed to ponder a counter-reform," but its execution was postponed until after the Russo-Japanese war. Now, in 1898, Kuropatkin was appointed Vannovskii's successor with full authority over the military establishment (excepting the unofficial military cabinet led by the minister of court, who was influential in questions of appointment and promotion). Out of a curious sense of consideration the post had been first offered to Obrucev. But the old man, although flattered, had been too modest (and sensible) to accept it." The French were happy about the nomination of Kuropatkin. He was received with enthusiasm by the Russian army, press, and political opinion. He was a convinced Russian patriot of the Pan-Slavist coloration, happy about the Franco-Russian alliance, and, after his long service in Central Asia, was a definite Anglophobe. His chief of general staff Saharov was also deemed industrious and of great intelligence." There was much to do for the new men in the war ministry. There was the problem of re-equipping the artillery, there was the menace of a conflict in Central Asia and in the Far East, and the danger of complications in Central Europe. "General Kuropatkin continues working with a Napoleonic activity. Every day he gives audiences until late in the night. The ministry has completely been awakened from its previous torpor".74 One man whose name had been mentioned in connection with several vacancies was Bobrikov of the Petersburg military district,

11 Moulin to war minister 30.I 1896. EMATSH 7 N 1474 72 Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE to war ministry 28.I 1898. EMATSH 7 N 1475 73 "Sur le nouveau ministre de la guerre et le nouveau chef de l'etat-major". Moulin 16.I 1898. EMATSH 7 N 1475 74 Moulin to war minister 10.1V 1898. EMATSH 7 N 1475

48 3 "the most capable chief of staff of the whole army; it is regrettable that his health is undermined by excessive work".76 The vacancy of governor-general of the Amur military district had arisen, and Bobrikov's name had been mentioned. But he would also have been a good man in Mussin-Puskin's stead in Odessa.76 Then there had been talk of his remaining in St. Petersburg with the title of adjunct to Grand Duke Vladimir, i.e. de facto commander of the military district.77 He had also been proposed for the vacant appointment of chief of the general staff.78 Bobrikov's ultimate appointment as governor-general of Finland indicates the importance which was accorded to the military and constitutional reform in Finland. Bobrikov was to integrate the military establishment of Finland into the Russian army and to eliminate Finnish separatism and constitutionalism, which was seen to be a danger to the security and uniformity of the empire.

3.3. Rearmament and Disarmament

A Polish economist, the president of the chamber of commerce in Warsaw, I.M. Bloch, saw the future in dismal colours. His home city was in the middle of the future battlefield and was certainly to suffer the fate of Paris in 1870-1871. Therefore he caused a committee to be established to ensure supplies for the Polish capital in case of a siege. This led Bloch to study further the economic problems of modern war. It was obvious to him that in the event of a great conflict all people would hide their gold, and nobody would be able to recover their outstanding debts; the lack of money

7' Moulin to war minister 9.W 1887. EMATSH 7 N 1471 76 "Au sujet de nominations divers". Moulin 16.I 1898. EMATSH 7 N 1475 77 "Nominations dans l'armee". Moulin 10.II 1898. EMATSH 7 N 1475 18 Moulin to war minister 30.I 1896. EMATSH 7 N 1474

4 — French information on ... 49 would create financial chaos. But there was no indication of the existence of a plan for a war economy in any European country. An even more menacing danger was the interruption of maritime commerce. International law did not secure such commerce from plunder and destruction; the naval war would be waged mercilessly by the privateers. The consuming nations would be left starving, while Russia and Austria would be unable to export. America, Australia, and India could export only at prohibitive insurance costs. No stores could be stocked in peacetime because of the excessive costs of such measures. Consequently there would arise a threat of famine for the labouring classes. Socialism was already rampant in Germany, and if the war was prolonged, occurrences like the Paris Commune were to be expected. And these occurrences would threaten victors as well as vanquished. Hence Bloch hoped that the danger of popular movements would make war impossible.i9 Bloch's subsequent detailed study on "The Future War"80 was an important and famous milestone in the progress of the antiwar movement. But these ideas of "socialists, Jews, and hysterical women" were not taken seriously by general staffs and others responsible for the preparation for war. They foresaw only a short war with one decisive battle during the first weeks. Consequently no planning or preparation for a long war was deemed necessary, nor were its consequences to be apprehended. But it is well known that the Emperor Nicholas, who was a good man, even if a bad emperor, was impressed by Bloch's book. He endorsed the author's ideas and, surprisingly, made his ministers adopt them. Murav'ev, the minister for foreign affairs, sent a circular to the principal powers and proposed a conference for disarmament. Moulin hastened to save the honour of the Russian statesmen. Of course they were not taken in by the idealism of their sovereign. But Kuropatkin had started planning the rearming of his artillery with modern cannons; and Witte had

79 A report on Bloch's lecture, war ministry to MAE 24.IV 1893. EMATSH 7 N 1480 80 I.S. Blioh. Buduseaja voina v tehni6eskom, ekonomieeskom i diplomati6es- kom otnosenijah I—VI, S. Petersburg 1898

50 been horrified at the costs, especially of heavy artillery. Therefore Witte and other ministers had greeted the emperor's proposal with enthusiasm. Russia would be spared immense costs if other powers could be made to give up their lead in military technology. Saharov, the chief of the general staff, also calculated that if part of the credits used for maintaining large numbers of men under arms could be redirected for building strategic railway lines, Russia's offensive power would essentially grow.81 Thus there was no reason for France to suspect that her ally had forsaken her. The suspicion had been virulent. France had not received any advance information about Murav'ev's circular. The move seemed to be a scheme against France, and one suggested by the German emperor" who was known for his attempts to influence his cousin Nicholas. Publicly the initiative of the ally was lauded: "the grand conception cannot help making a profound impression on the whole world".83 But private reservations were voiced by the French press: "the new proof of the emperor's chivalrous character"" was only a "beautiful dream"85 which, if realized, would endanger France's vital interests. The alliance had made possible the hope of some day regaining the lost provinces, but the proposed disarmament implied giving up revanche. The proposal was thus a piece of Russian perfidy, if not a blind acceptance of a suggestion by William II.S6 The Germans were seen rejoicing because the cool reception of Russia's proposal in Paris was causing a chasm between the two allies.87 Also The Times wrote with malice: "Until the question (of Alsace and Lorraine) is settled she (France) cannot even consent to diminish her military burden. So she will stand alone in her inability to adhere to the plans

81 "Au sujet de la circulaire du Comte Mouravieff". Moulin 8.IX 1898. EMATSH 7 N 1475 8' Delcasse to the ambassador in St. Petersburg 27.VIII 1898. AMAE, C.P. Rus- sie N.S. 16 83 Montebello, ambassor in St. Petersburg to Delcasse 24.VIII 1898. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 16 84 Le Petit Journal 29.VIII 1898 (a collection of newspaper cuttings in AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 16, p. 126—) 85 Le Matin 29.VIII 1898 86 Le petit bleu 29.VIII 1898 8' Ambassador in Berlin to MAE 31.VIII 1898. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 16, p. 239 51 of ally and friend .."88 In fact, France was not alone. Denmark did not wish for disarmament, because she did not want to give up her revanche, the lost provinces of Slesvig and Holstein.89 Serbia promised to be the foremost advocate of peace and disarmament "if only the tribune of Europe will give us what belongs to us ... Long live the unity of the Serb nation! "90 The Italians declared that a nation was able to live free only on the condition of having a strong army prepared for any eventuality. Some papers named names without any adornment: they wanted Trieste and Trentino as a precondition for any disarmament.91 The Americans remarked that the army was no burden for them, while their navy could not, "of course", be diminished.92 For many Germans disarmament was the very negation of their empire. The officer corps especially was worried lest the proposal was accepted because they had obtained substancial privileges since 1871. And who would teach the workers discipline and orderliness if not the army? Where could the Poles be made learn the German language if not in military service?93 Thus, everybody wanted peace, but only on the condition that it secured their rightful aspirations and vital interests. Because the vital interests of the several nations were diametrically contradictory, and because they as sovereign powers were the sole arbiters of their interests, the precondition of a lasting peace was a great war. The vital interests were held to be national security, power, greatness, and honour. There was no attempt to redefine them. Out of respect for its august sponsor the conference was held. It convened at the Hague in 1899, after if was ensured that the programme would not diminish national sovereignty, would not mean any giving up of interests, or any disarmament. Of course, the Hague peace conference was not useless even

88 The Times 31.VIII 1898 89 French envoy in Copenhagen to MAE 1.IX 1898. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 16 p. 239 9° Male novine 1.IX 1898 91 Ambassador in Rome to MAE 15.IX 1898. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 16 p. 320 92 Ambassador in Washington to MAE 12.IX 1898. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 16 p. 309 93 Ambassador in Berlin to MAE 3.IX 1898. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 16 52 if there were no immediate results. The difficulties on the road to international understanding had to be mapped out as a necessary precondition for further attempts to overcome them. The Franco-Russian alliance was able to live through this trial, because no arms were discarded. Hence the rejoicing of the German and English press proved premature. But this was not the sole trial for Franco-Russian relations.

3.4. A Central Asian Diversion against England

During the Near East crisis of 1897 British influence was suspected of being behind the Cretan disorders. There was nothing much that Russia could do against England in the Mediterranean. The only effective means of making the English hesitate was to menace their Indian frontiers. But at that time Russia had only about 15 000 men in Transcaspia and 30 000 men in Turkestan, half of whom only were free for action. The Transcaspian railway was able to carry only four trains a day. Thus the minimum army of 200 000 men needed against India was beyond Russia's capacity to assemble. The Russian general staff thus saw their Central Asian position not as a launching point for a serious attack on India, but only as a means of threatening the English any time they caused mischief in Constantinople or at the Straits. "That has been the policy of Skobelev, Cernjaev, Kuropatkin, Komarov ..." said Moulin's informant.94 In 1898 the march of Major Marchand into an untenable military position in Fashoda involved France in a conflict with England. Delcasse had the greatest difficulties in disentangling his country from the embarrassing situation that arose because of Fashoda. He had a fleeting hope of being able to use the Shimonoseki coalition of 1895, France-Russia-Germany, to

94 Moulin to war minister 3.IV 1897. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 33. DDF XIII/1, n:o 177 53 counter the unyielding English and save the untenable French position on the upper Nile. But Russia now paid back the French refusal to support her in Constantinople in 1895-97. Delcasse had to find a solution without Russian support. Afterwards Kuropatkin tried to explain that Russia had done everything she could to help France and that she would have joined her ally if the incident had really ended in open conflict. As proof he pointed out the fact that Russia had mobilized her ports: Libau, Dünamünde, Kronstadt, the Black Sea ports, and, in the first instance, the Far Eastern ports. Two hundred guns had been placed in Vladivostok, and Port Arthur had received 279 guns. Ten million roubles had been spent and 12 000 men had been detached to Port Arthur, "excellent troops who would put up a defence comparable to that of Sevastopol". But naturally Russia had been cautious and guarded, not eager to sacrify thousands of lives and millions of roubles, in her dire financial straits, only in order to save Fashoda for France.95 Russian armaments in the Far Eastern ports were a cold comfort for France. Kuropatkin's statement is more important as an indication of the fact that Russia's interest was turning strongly to the East. Russian pressure on the borders of British India might have been of more importance for France in her dilemma. Kuropatkin told Moulin that during the crisis of 1885 Vannovskii had made him study the problem. He had then concluded that Russia was in no position to wage war with any chance of success in the direction of the Afghan-Indian frontiers. Of course Russia would have fought if compelled to, but it would have been at an enormous cost of money and men, with not much result from the laborious efforts involved. During the twelve years of Kuropatkin's governorship of Turkestan, the situation had nevertheless somewhat improved. The railway from the Caspian had reached Tashkent, the army in Turkestan had been reinforced, and more attention had been paid to the details of organization. But the British had more than compensated for this Russian progress. Thus Russia had been unable to undertake any serious demonstration of force during the Fashoda crisis; she had had to content herself with

95 Moulin to war minister 30.I 1899. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 34. DDF XV/1, n:o 52

54

a strictly defensive attitude. At that moment (1899) measures were being accelerated and a plan of mobilization and troop concentration for Central Asia was being prepared. The railway which was being build from Mery to Kushka would make possible an attack in the direction of Herat. (Map 12.) But for a war against Afghanistan an army of 100 000 men would be needed, while an expedition towards India needed an army of 250 000 men. In the beginning of 1899, said Kuropatkin, the general staff had revised the number of troops in Asia.

Russian troops in Asia in 1899 Caucasian military district 320 000 Kazan military district 220 000 Siberian military districts 40 000 Turkestan and Transcaspia 75 000 Amur and Port Arthur 80 000 in all 735 000

Kuropatkin estimated that about 120 000 men could be used for operations after leaving about 200 000 men to guard against surprise moves by the Amir and the Sultan. A serious defect was the absence of great units. Therefore he was going to organize,new staffs for army corps: Transcaspian, Turkestan, and Southern Ussuri corps in addition to the second Caucasian corps.96 In case of a war in Asia Kuropatkin planned to mobilize the following troops against the British: Ist line Transcaspian army corps 2 infantry regiments Kushka 1 reserve regiment Turkestan army corps 1 Cossack brigade Samarkand 3 infantry brigades 1 artillery brigade Ilnd line Caucasian army corps 1 Caucasian brigade 1 native brigade 1 reserve regiment 1 cavalry brigade 1 Caucasian grenadier division XIII army corps 1st division Vladikavkas 21st division 36th division 97

96 Moulin to war minister 30.I 1899. = 9s 97 "Plan de concentration contre les Anglo-Afghan en Asie". Moulin 16.IV 1899. EMATSH 7 N 1475 55 But the key problem was to get these men to the theatre of war. In three weeks 30 000-40 000 men could be concentrated on the Afghan border, and 75 000-80 000 men in forty days. A considerable time would be needed to assemble 200 000- 250 000 men there. Therefore everything must be done to postpone a conflict with England. Only after the Transcaspian railway was connected with the railway network of the empire could an army of 300 000-400 000 men be concentrated on the Anglo-Russian frontiers in Asia. Then it would take two months.98 From other sources Moulin knew that the Russian general staff planned to build a connecting link from Orenburg to Tashkent, and additional lines towards the frontier between Bukhara and Afghanistan. Financing the lines was problem, especially because of the quarrel with Witte, who wanted to connect the Transcaspian railway to his Siberian trunk line with a Tashkent-Tomsk railway.99 This connection could be completed at the earliest in 1904. Kuropatkin himself was interested in explaining the Russian weakness in Central Asia because the French were demanding action against the English there. Lieutenant Grilliers, an officer on a mission to Persia and the Russian empire, saw the Russian position in a more positive light. He thought that the conquest of the Middle East was for the Russians a question of only a few days. The local Russians had told him that the march to Khorasan in the east and Erzerum in the west was a manifest destiny for Russia. The first objective was Herat, from where the Persian Gulf could be reached in the south and Kandahar in the south-east. "The realization of this programme in the near future is not doubted by the Russians ... I have seen numerous reinforcements being sent to the Afghan frontier as well as evident preparations for the march on Herat ..." Secret preparation in Persia were also rumoured of. Russia

98 "Conversation avec le General Kouropatkine sur les conditions d'une guerre sur les confins Anglo-Russes en Asie". Moulin 19.I 1901. EMATSH 7 N 1476 99 "Sur un projet de voie ferree tres-importante en Asie Centrale". Moulin 25.I 1899

56 could thus find an outlet to the sea through Merv-Herat- Bander Abbas, open the door to the riches of South-East Asia through Herat-Hindukush, take the keys of Euro-Asian commerce between the Caspian Sean and the Persian Gulf. The Central Asian markets would be opened for her and denied to others. In this way Russia would grow into an all-powerful industrial, commercial, and military empire.100 Another officer on a mission, Captain de la Taillie, reported that enormous efforts were being made and considerable troops were being concentrated and camps fortified a few kilometres from the border so that they could avail themselves of the first occasion to proceed at a lightning speed. This officer concluded that Russia was not going to attack India or Afghanistan, she was going to occupy the coasts of the Persian Gulf. "It seems certain that the Caucasus and Turkestan will be the theatres of important events in the more or less near future"."' These are impressions gained from interviews with the local Russians who, as colonialists, were as eager as ever to push forward and to dream of carving up new empires. They are no proof of concrete plans for action. Kuropatkin in St. Petersburg judged the situation much more soberly; and of course the military alone were not able to decide the direction of Russian politics. But the interviews are proof of the dreams that the Russians would have liked to realize had they been able to do so. They are also examples of the fashionable arguments of commercial and industrial advantage to be gained by imperialism. Novoe Vremja declared that if Persia was only a market for Russia, the invasion of British commercial and political influence in the southern parts of that country need not be very alarming. But Persia, in fact, played a more important role because of her geographical position. It was through her that Russia was going to penetrate to the Indian Ocean.'°' Also the threat of

100 "Rapport du Lieutenant Grilliers sur son voyage en Russie et Perse fait en 1899-1900". EMATSH 7 N 1484 101 "Rapport sur un voyage fait en Russie par le capitaine de la Taillie en No- vembre et Decembre 1899". EMATSH 7 N 1484 102 Novoe Vremja 14.IV 1899. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 17 57 eventual German influence from the Baghdad railway worried the Russians.103 The essential reason why these dreams were left unrealized and why Russia was content with the status quo in Central Asia — after her great conquests of the years 1860-1895 — was that her attention was turning to the Far East. She deemed herself unable to conquer Persia, either militarily or commercially. To prevent others from doing that, to preserve Persia for her own future use, she used her influence at the court of the Shah and compelled Persia to undertake an obligation not to build or to give concession to build railways in the country for two decades, 1890-1910. It was deemed that this prohibition would prevent the British from building railways from India to Mesopotamia, Syria and Arabia. "The Russian general staff has no intention of occupying the Persian Gulf or of pushing railways to the coast, because it is impossible to face so many expenses at the same time ... The Trans-Siberian and Manchurian railways are devouring enough money, as well as the building and fortifying of Port Arthur".104 At the beginning of 1900 Kuropatkin explained that Russia had no reason to take advantage of England's difficulties (in South Africa). Afghanistan and India were too far away to be conquered. The Transcaspian railway made possible the defence of Central Asia, but for an offensive the connecting line with the Russian railways was necessary. But for a while Russia had enough to do in building her railways in Manchuria and in developing her Far Eastern possessions. He had studied the question of Constantinople, too, and hoped one day to see the realization of Russian hopes there. Sooner or later Russia had to obtain the keys of the Black Sea; but not yet.105 Persia continued to be an irritant between England and Russia, in addition to more actual causes of dispute, until the entente of 1907, and even after that. In 1902 Moulin reported

103 Moulin to war minister 25.IV 1898. EMATSH 7 N 1475 104 "Au sujet de la concession de chemins de fer en Perse". Moulin 8.I 1900. EMATSH 7 N 1476 105 Ambassador on St. Petersburg to MAE 30.I 1900. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 17. DDF XVI/1, n:o 62

58 that the Russians were irritated by English attempts to infiltrate to the Persian Gulf and Persia itself, which the Russians considered a domaine of their old Asian policy. Russia needed an outlet on a warm sea, and a railway from Russia to the Gulf would make her the dominating influence in Persia, "to the benefit not only of Russia but also and above all of Persia herself, considering the deplorable situation in this state, which is led by an incapable government".106 But Russia never had the leisure to attempt a definite domination of Persia.

3.5. Russian Strength at the Turn of the Century

By the turn of the century the peacetime strength of the Russian army was given by Moulin in his reports as 34 000 officers and 860 000 men, with 150 000 horses. There are differences between the reports, which may be due to the inclusion or exclusion of reserve and militia cadres and Asian units. Some variation must also be due to defects in compiling the statistics. Thus the numbers must be taken as giving only a general impression. The mobilization strength with 2.85 million reservists was 3700 000 men in 1899, and the total amount of trained soldiers, militia included, was 4.55 million men.107 The

106 "1'Angleterre et la Russie en Perse". Moulin 1902. EMATSH 7 N 1506. A useful study of great power imperialism in Persia is Firuz Kazemzadeh, Russia and Britain in Persia, 1864-1914. A Study in Imperialism. Yale Rus- sian and East European Studies 6, Yale University Press 1968

107 Effectives in Europe in November 1901 officers 34,000 men 860,000 horses 150,000 "Note sur les forces militaires de la Russie d'Europe, novembre 1901". EMATSH 7 N 1506 59 army consisted of 959 battalions and 603 squadrons and sotnias with 357 field batteries and numerous mortar, depot, fortress and siege detachments, as well as various engineer formations.l°8 The detachments were organized in 23 army corps of 2-3 divisions consisting of four regiments of four battalions each. There were twenty cavalry divisions of four regiments of six

107 Continued Effectives in October 1898 men 967,655 horses 160,414 "Effectifs au mois d'octobre dernier". Moulin 21.III 1899. EMATSH 7 N 1475 Trained reserves 1.I 1896 2,703,000 men 1.I 1897 2,753,072 1.I 1898 2,800,000 1.I 1899 2,850,000 "Sur les effectives de la reserve de recrutement". Moulin 21.111 1899. EMATSH 7 N 1475 Cossack troops Cossacks of 19-41 years 426,453 fit for service 363,457 in active service 183,328 in active reserve 219,089 "Sur les troupes cosaques en 1897". Moulin 26.III 1899. EMATSH 7 N 1475 Total manpower 5 active classes, 21-25 years of age 1.3 million 13 reserve classes 2.85 militia, 39-43 years, trained 0.5 militia, 21-25 years, untrained 1.3 militia, II class, untrained 6 trained soldiers 4.55 mobilization strength 3.7 "Note sur les forces militaires ..." 108 Detachments in the peacetime army in 1901 Infantry 832 active battalions 959 45 fortress battalions battalions 82 reserve battalions Cavalry 542 squadrons and sotnias 603 61 depot squadrons Artillery 357 field batteries 40 horse batteries 22 mortar batteries 34 reserve batteries 14 depot batteries 195 fortress companies 9 siege companies 5 sortie batteries

60 squadrons each. There was one brigade of six batteries of field artillery for each division, and one sapper battalion for each army corps.109 The peacetime effectives of the active troops were 100 % of the mobilization strength in the cavalry, 50 % in the infantry, and 80 % in the artillery. The mobilized strength of the active detachments was 30 000 officers and 1118 000 men. There were 183 328 Cossacks in the active service and more than 200 000 in the active reserve. They formed 53 active regiments and 148 regiments in all. In addition to the Cossack Regiments the reserve consisted of 28 infantry divisions and 27 artillery brigades. Their peacetime cadres amounted to 13 % of the mobilization strength in the infantry and 20 % in the artillery."° The fortress troops consisted of 15 % of wartime effectives in the infantry and 33 % in the artillery.111 The mobilized strength of the Russian army in 1900 officers men horses guns active troops 30 000 1 118 000 320 000 3258 reserve 22 000 585 000 143 000 166 fortress 3 800 213 000 2 000 Turkestan 1 800 90 000 17 000 128 Siberia 850 51 000 4 500 64 Amur 1 600 80 000 20 000 148 Kwanctuna 300 15 500 20 000 112 Kovno, Novo-Georgievsk, Warsaw, and Brest-Litovsk were first-class fortresses. Kronstadt, Sveaborg, Ivangorod,

108 Continued Engineers 23 sapper battalions 8 pontoon battalions 4 railway battalions 2 reserve cadre battalions 9 fortress sapper battalions 7 mine companies 2 river mine companies 6 telegraph sections 6 balloon sections 7 pigeon sections "Note sur les forces militaires de la Russie d'Europe, novembre 1901". EMATSH 7 N 1506 109 "Note ..." = 108 110 "Note .. = 108 111 "Note ... = 1°8 61 Vladivostok, Libau, Ossovec, and Sevastopol were given second-class status. There were numerous third-class fortresses and fortresses without class."3 European fortresses, if

112 The Russian army in Asia in 1901 Turkestan 2 army corps 8 rifle brigades 2 reserve infantry brigades 72 battalions 1 Cossack division 2 Cossack brigades 94 sotnias 2 artillery brigades 2 fortress artillery battalions 7 engineer companies Siberian garrisons 1 rifle battalion 8 reserve battalions 2 sotnias 2 reserve batteries 40 reserve battalions to be formed when mobilization occurred 8 depot battalions —"— The military district of the Amur 5 rifle brigades 3 Cossack regiments 2 artillery brigades 1 artillery group 2 artillery batteries 124 guns in all 2 sapper battalions 1 railway battalion 4 reserve battalions 7 fortress battalions 9 fortress artillery companies 4 fortress engineer companies 60 battalions to be formed when mobilization occurred 4 squadrons 20 batteries The peninsula of Kwangtung 1 rifle brigade 1 Cossack regiment 1 group of 3 batteries 1 fortress infantry regiment 2 fortress artillery battalions "Note sur l'armee Russe II" s.d. EMATSH 7 N 1506 113 Classification of fortresses 1st class Kovno, Novo-Georgievsk, Warsaw, Brest-Litovsk 2nd Kronstadt, Sveaborg, Ivangorod, Vladivostok, Libau, Sevastopol, Ossovec 3rd Vyborg, Ust-Dvinsk (= Dünamünde), Zegrze, Kerb, Oeakov, Mihailovsk, Kushka no class Grodno, Dubno, Odessa, Bendery, Alexandrovo, Gerenig Caucasia Hunza, Georgievsk, Ahalcyh, Zakataly Transcaspia Krasnovodsk, Merv, Alexandrovsk

62 identified, are given on map 13. The infantry was in the course of being equipped with the 7.62 mm magazine rifle. The cavalry had a carabine of identical calibre. The field artillery had guns of 86.8 or 106.7 mm, with eight cannons in each battery. The horse batteries had six guns of 86.8 mm. There were six mortars of 152.4 mm in each mortar battery. A quick-firing cannong of 76.2 mm was adopted in 1900, but the new guns were arriving very slowly in the batteries."

3.6. The Military and Constitutional Reform in Finland

The Finnish troops consisted of 5009 infantrymen and 818 dragoons in active service. The permanent cadre of reserve consisted of 40 officers and 192 non-commissioned officers. There were 32 857 men in the reserve, who had served their time in the active battalions. In the militia there were 25 officers, 2329 non-commissioned officers and 75 074 men, trained in the reserve companies for three months. Thus the Grand Duchy was able to call to arms about 100 000 men in case of war. This was the situation at the moment of introducing the compulsory military service, said Moulin.115 Of course, Moulin meant the Russian law of military service, which came into force in 1901 to replace the Finnish law of 1878. The Finns were to serve on equal terms with other Russian subjects. The Russian generals had not liked the separate Finnish army. For the Russian chauvinists it had been a repugnant

113 Continued Turkestan Taskent, Hodzkent, Dzarkent, Samarkand, Margelan, Kerki, Cimkent, Perovski, Zaizanski Far East Nikolaevsk, Poret, Port Arthur "Note sur 1'armee Russe II", EMATSH 7 N 1506 114 "Note sur les forces militaires de la Russie d'Europe, novembre 1901". EMATSH 7 N 1506 115 "Composition des troupes finnois". Moulin 19.III 1899. EMATSH 7 N 1475 63 attribute of Finland's pretended autonomy. Pan-Slavist soldiers saw in it a potential danger, an armed ally of Germany or Sweden. As early as 1886, inspecting the fortress of Vyborg and seeing its bad condition, Bobrikov had concluded that the essential military danger was the fact that the Finns had succeeded in expanding a provincial self-government into full political autonomy, with an army of their own under a separate command. This prevented the unified defence of the Baltic coast under the command of the St. Petersburg military district. When appointed governor-general of Finland in 1898, Bobrikov, with Kuropatkin, Pobedonoscev, Plehwe, and other centralizers of the Russian state, sketched out the February Manifesto (15.II 1899) by Nicholas II. Military and other "all- imperial" questions were to be transferred from the Finnish Diet to the imperial instances. The Russians thought that a provincial Diet had no call to decide questions of imperial defence. For the Finns this was a grave crime against the constitutional rights confirmed by the imperial oath of Alexander I, Nicholas I, Alexander II, Alexander III, and Nicholas II himself. The Finns had been the most stupidly loyal subjects in the whole empire, but this coup made an end of their loyalty. Then Russia really had reason to be worried about the security of her north-western confines. Moulin continued his report concerning the precautions taken in case of disorder in Finland:

"Even though Finland is only a fly compared with the immense empire, and though the population is composed of heterogeneous elements — the town bourgeoisie and the aristocracy are Swedish, the people in the countryside are Finnish — which do not have identical tendencies, the Russian government believes it necessary to take precautionary measures in case the discontent provoked by the obligatory service should lead to local trouble. In order to be able immediately to suppress them with the greatest vigour and to prevent them from degenerating into disorder of a general character, the war ministry has made ready

64 4 a mixed division in St. Petersburg to assist the Russian troops positioned in the military district of Finland. The division consisted of four Guards regiments, Moskovskii, Semenovskii, Pavlovskii, Finljandskii; one artillery brigade or 24 cannons and one battery of Guards horse artillery; and one calvary brigade»6 No mutiny compelled the Russian army to reconquer Finland, after all. But 60-40 % of the Finnish conscripts refused to enter the army (1902-1904) — many preferred emigrating to the USA. For the generals this was a clear proof of the unreliability of the Finns. They were temporarily freed from military service, like the wild Asiatic subjects of the empire, and made to pay an annual tax of ten million marks instead. All Finnish troops and military installations were abolished, even the Russian military district of Finland. Instead a new army corps, the twenty-second, was created. It consisted of two rifle brigades — the second brigade had been formed to replace the abolished Finnish battalions — and a dragoon regiment, an artillery brigade, and two Cossack sotnias policing Helsinki, the Finnish capital. Bobrikov then concentrated on Russifying the Finnish administration until he was murdered in 1904 by Eugen Schauman, whose loyalty to Nicholas II could not suppress his aversion to Bobrikov's policy.

3.7. Kuropatkin's Plans for War in the West

Kuropatkin was a new man in the command of the Russian army. The French were at first a bit apprehensive regarding his ideas for the war plans against the Triple Alliance.

116 "Measures de precaution contre l'eventualite de troubles en Finlande". EMATSH 7 N 1475

5 — French information on ... 65 The Russian general staff supposed that the Germans would have a strong concentration of troops in East Prussia. Consequently they kept their Narew army comparatively strong. Moulin had hoped that the Narew army would undertake an attack towards Thorn-Allenstein (as Samsonov later did in 1914) to ease the pressure on the French frontier, in spite of the menace of a flanking movement by the Germans in East Prussia. But the Russians seemed to be adopting a waiting, defensive attitude, until they had ascertained where the German troop concentration was in fact.117 They could not think about a direct attack from Warsaw towards Berlin. A strong peace-time concentration on the left bank of the Vistula in the western salient of Poland, in preparation for the attack, would certainly have provoked the Germans to counter- measures. And fortifying the bridgeheads, building barracks for the attack troops, and collecting all the necessary material would have given rise to prohibitive costs. Thus the upshot was that the French were not able to count on immediate and direct help from the east. But there seemed to be emerging two schools of thought in the Russian general staff. Some officers thought that although Austria was numerically the stronger enemy (because the French would engage part of the German strength), a Russian victory over Germany would be morally decisive, because she was the core of the Triple Alliance and the foremost military power in the world. Even though part of the German forces would be fighting the French, a substantial part of them might be concentrated on the Narew front, whence they might try a breakthrough in the rear of the Russian troops operating against the Austrians. These officers wanted to have a strong defence on the Narew and on the Niemen. The troops of the Warsaw and Vilna districts were to be concentrated against East Prussia, with the St. Petersburg and Moscow troops in reserve. Only the troops of the Kiev district with a few Moscow units would be concentrated against the Austrians, whose operations had no decisive importance. Russia was to reduce East Prussia first, then beat the Austrians, and then attack towards Berlin.

117 "Sur l'elaboration d'un nouveau plan de concentration n:o 18". Moulin 28.XI 1898. EMATSH 7 N 1475 66 The French would probably have preferred this alternative. But another school of thought demanded against Austria the use of all troops that were not absolutely necessary for the defence against a German offensive. They thought that the result of their plan would be a victory over the Austrians. The enemy would be chased over the Carpathians, where the Russians would have an easy line of defence. Then the Russian offensive could be directed towards the Oder, and over the Oder towards Berlin. This school of thought calculated that the Russian army would be ready to start fighting on the twenty- fifth day, the victory over the Austrians would be secured by the thirtieth to thirty-fifth day, and the follow-up on the Oder could begin on the fortieth to forty-fifth day.118 It seems that the latter school of thought won. Kuropatkin and Saharov planned to concentrate 900 000 men on the German front and 785 000 men on the Austrian front, with 102 000 men keeping an eye on the Rumanians and 83 000 men preparing for the Bosphorus expedition. The 255 000 men on the Caucasian front would be available in the west if Turkey remained neutral.119 Even in this plan there seemed to be more troops

118 "Au sujet du double courant d'opinion de l'etat-major Russe a propos du plan de concentration en cas de guerre avec la Triple Alliance". Moulin 16.IV 1899. EMATSH 7 N 1475

119 Assignment of forces according to the plans of 1899-1901 German front cavalry 14 divisions, 5 regiments infantry 11 army corps, 3 rifle brigades artillery 3 mortar regiments reserve 10 divisions militia 5 divisions officers 19,000 men 900,000 horses 205,000 cannons 1,900 Austrian front cavalry 13 divisions, 10 regiments infantry 10 army corps, 2 rifle brigades artillery 1 mortar regiment reserve 8 divisions militia 5 divisions officers 17,000 men 758,000 horses 185,000 cannons 1,800 67 concentrated against Germany than against Austria. But in fact the Russians had planned their concentration in such a way that the troops in strength on the Prussian border were only a precaution against a German attack on the rear of the main Russian offensive to the south-west. All this existed with the mental reservation that the army corps could be transported from the Narew front to the south against the Austrians, taking advantage of the internal Polish railway system, if the Germans did not attack. The essential idea was that no useful attack against Germany was possible before the Austrians were beaten. Everything was aimed at this initial victory.120 Thus the Russian plan was useless from the French point of view. Moulin was rather sarcastic:

119 Continued Rumanian front cavalry 9 regiments infantry 1 army corps, 1 rifle brigade artillery 1 mortar regiment reserve 3 divisions officers 2,100 men 102,000 horses 23,000 cannons 300 Odessa and Crimea (the expeditionary corps) cavalry 4 regiments infantry 1 army corps reserve 1 division militia 1 division officers 1,600 men 83,000 horses 14,000 cannons 300 Caucasian front (available in the west if Turkey remained neutral) Cossacks 3 divisions infantry 2 army corps, 3 rifle brigades artillery 1 mortar regiment reserve 6 divisions, 4 regiments officers 5,500 men 255.000 horses 82,000 cannons 532 "Note sur les forces militaires de la Russie d'Europe, novembre 1901" EMATSH 7 N 1506 1'-'0 "Sur le plan de concentration contre la Triple Alliance". Moulin 2.I 1899. EMATSH 7 N 1475 68 "The Russian general staff officers are without doubt very brilliant, but endowed with an excess of imagination. This defect is unhappily felt very distinctly in the committees which revise annually the plan of troop concentration. It leads to ideas like the shuttling movement between the northern and southern frontier in Poland ..."121 The sketches (maps 14 and 16) where Moulin has featured the Russian concentrations tally with ZaionÖkovskii's (map 15) in their general lines, in spite of several differences and inaccuracies in detail. There is no longer any central or main army, it has definitely been divided into two, the Narew army and the Bug army. Rather strong flank armies are in position on the Niemen and in the South-west.

3.8. If Francis Joseph Should Die

In 1898 there had emerged an additional reason for the strong Russian troop concentration on the Austrian border. The old emperor Francis Joseph was known to be suffering from bad health and his death was expected in the near future. It was felt that the Danubian empire was rent by national strife, and it was expected to dissolve once the venerated sovereign passed away. Moulin informed Paris that Russia and Germany might connive at dividing the spoils. Germany would thus gain eight million Austrian Germans. William II might try to buy Russian consent with Galicia as a compensation for the addition to German strength. Moulin supposed that the Russian general staff and the Pan-Slavists would not be content with the Carpathian frontier only but would demand also a blank cheque on the Bosphorus.122 Neither the war ministry nor the general staff in Paris were

127 "Au sujet du nouveau plan de concentration". Moulin 10.III 1899. EMATSH 7 N 1475 122 "Au sujet de l'hypothese du demembrement de l'Autriche". Moulin 18.II1 1899. EMATSH 7 N 1475 69 interested in these hypotheses. But the minister for foreign affairs, Delcasse, was a statesman who saw the danger of a new combination of European powers. He encouraged Moulin to study the Russian intentions further in the light of an eventual Austrian complication. Moulin reported that the Russian soldiers and patriots believed that an immediate dismemberment of the Austrian empire would occur in the event of Francis Joseph's death. Then the German provinces would immediately and spontaneously join the German empire. Russia would not oppose these developments provided she could foresee legitimate compensation. Moulin had heard this opinion uttered by Saharov, Dragomirov, and the Russian military attaché in Vienna, Voronin. The changes in the European balance of power would be enormous. Germany would gain strength through the addition of eight million Austrian Germans. Istria would become a German port open on the Mediterranean. In compensation Germany would give Trieste and the Trentino to Italy. Hungary would become independent. Bohemia's fate might cause difficulties, if Russia should demand independence for her in order to maintain a Slav vanguard on the flank of the German empire. France and Russia could not allow Germany to grow without compensation. If she wanted to avoid a war on two fronts against these powers, she had to give compensation to at least one of them. She might, for example, offer Galicia and Bukovina to Russia. This would be a mediocre acquisition for Russia, because of the 7,5 million inhabitants only four million were Ruthenians or orthodox Russians, while the rest were Poles. But the splendid frontier of the Carpathians would be a consolation. Transylvania could be given to Romania without difficulties. (It seems that Hungarian opinion was ignored by the Russian patriots). The Russian generals were inclined to leave France without any compensation. They calculated that she could not wish for Belgium or Switzerland. The only compensation that could be thought of was the recovery of Alsace and Lorraine. But Germany certainly was not going to give them up without a war. Therefore France had better submit to renouncing this compensation. Nicholas II was a pacific ruler and would not 70 accept an offensive war. To Russia Germany would offer compensation without a threat of war, even eagerly; she might even consent to discussing the question of Bohemia. From this it appeared that the only hope of a war for France was a previous engagement with Russia, or the improbable case of Russian diplomatists being dissatisfied with the compensation obtained by the soldiers. This was not very probable because generally Russian diplomacy was much more moderate in its desires than the general staff. It was true that the Russian patriots and publicists were more exacting. They held an eventual German Istria to be a danger for the Balkan Slays. They saw the annexation of Austria by Germany as a step on the road to Salonika and Constantinople, or at least towards a stronger German influence on the Sultan. The result might be that German commerce would force its way from Hamburg via Constantinople and Angora to Baghdad. Thus all Russia's hopes in the Orient would be in vain. That was why the patriots demanded Constantinople as a compensation for the annexation of Austria, in addition to and before Galicia and Bukovina. If these people had been able to make their programme official, the result would surely have been war. Then France would have had the chance of reconquering Alsace and Lorraine. But unfortunately there was not much hope of such a turn. On the contrary, a great danger menaced France. If the Austrian empire dissolved and the Triple Alliance disappeared, the military convention between France and Russia would be nullified. It had been stipulated that the convention should last as long as the enemy alliance. With the convention nullified, France would have to face alone a Germany of sixty million inhabitants, growing fast, and with a new triple alliance with Italy and Hungary. It was true that the Hungarians were not very friendly towards the Germans, but they disliked the Russians even more. By this reasoning it was of the utmost importance that a new arrangement be made between France and Russia, while the men who were favourably disposed towards France were in influential positions in the army and in the court.123

1'3 "Au sujet de certains demarches de 1'Empereur d'Allemagne et de l'actua- 71 Of course, this recommendation was given more urgency by the continuous stream of information concerning the German support for Russia's Far Eastern policy. Clearly it was in the German interest to see the Russian army disappear from the western frontier towards the Pacific. By the summer of 1899 the Russian general staff was seriously occupied with the Austrian problem. It was true that German schemes in Turkey, the Kaiser's flirtation with the Sultan and expressions of pan-Islamic feelings, caused dissatisfaction in St. Petersburg. But the possibility of the Austrian complication arising on Francis Joseph's death worried the Russian general staff much more.''} Four armies were planned for the operation that aimed at securing the compensation for Germany's booty. One army was to occupy Galicia and Bukovina, eventually to advance to help the Rumanians in Transylvania. Another army was to cross the Carpathians in order to help the southern Slays, whom Russia was going to declare independent, in Croatia, in Slovenia, and in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The third army was to advance via Upper Silesia to help the Bohemians, whom Russia would also proclaim independent. The fourth army was to occupy the coasts of the Bosphorus. The general staff tried to reassure Moulin: all these operations would not absorb as many Russian troops as were required against Austria at present, in case of a war with the Triple Alliance. Consequently, there would remain at least as many troops as before on the frontier against Germany. All the above-mentioned viewpoints only add up to preliminary plans or sketches for the foreseen operation. No exact information was given on the composition of the four armies, or on their concentration or planned action. The nature of enemy resistance seems to have been totally ignored, for instance, in crossing Upper Silesia, i.e. a German province. These plans are a good illustration of the Russian "system" of government. At this time no cabinet existed. The soldiers compiled in all earnest plans for redrawing the map of half Europe without consulting the foreign ministry. It is not clear

lite du partage de 1'Autriche". Moulin 24.VIII 1899. EMATSH 7 N 1475 124 "Eventualite du demembrement de 1'Autriche". Moulin 10.IV 1900. EMATSH 7 N 1476

72 how much even Nicholas II was told. Thus it is futile to ask whether Russia wanted to dominate the eventually independent Slav states, or to open her way to the Mediterranean or the Indian Ocean. It is not at all clear who was Russia. There existed different currents of opinion in Russia, and something was always wanted by somebody. The decision-making was unorganized and influenced by the strength of the currents of opinion on the command posts of the empire. The viewpoints described above had impregnated the general staff, but it was not until 1914-1916 that they were being received sympathetically at the Foreign Office. The civilian leaders were much more concerned with the reactions of other powers to extravagant Russian appetites. The moment to make actual plans or to act on them never came. The urgency of these worries abated when the Emperor Francis Joseph did not die — until 1916, of course — and other problems grew more burning. Nevertheless, as late as 1901 Voronin reported from Vienna that Germany was continually scheming for the annexation of the German provinces as well as of Trieste and Pola. William's agents were busily preparing the ground for annexation. The general staff in St. Petersburg was very much inclined to believe these reports, Moulin was told.16

3.9. The Dual Alliance Strengthened

Delcasse, the statesman who very nearly made France a great power again, had much reason to be worried over the state of the Dual Alliance by the turn of the century. 12 It was true that France and Russia had acted together in 1895 in some minor

126 "Sur les appetites de l'Allemagne å l'egard de l'Autriche". Moulin 5.I1 1901. EMATSH 7 N 1476 1,7 Chistopher Andrew, Theophile Delcasse and the Making of the Entente Cor- diale. A Reappraisal of French Foreign Policy 1898-1905. New York 1968. p. 119— gives a clear picture of Delcasse's policy, but does not mention Moulin's alarming reports about the Austrian complication 73 questions outside Europe, e.g. they had protested against the British administration in Egypt. They had also chased Japan out of her conquests in 1895, where Germany had been a partner, too. But then in 1896 France had not supported Russia's schemes for the Straits. Nor had Russia helped France at the time of the Fashoda crisis in 1898. There were even personal reasons for this mutual coldshouldering: the ministers for foreign affairs of the respective countries, Hanotaux and Murav'ev, did not like each other. Then there was always the danger of a Russo-German entente, for which William II was eagerly working. It is true that he masked his proposals in the garment of a continental coalition, modelling it on the Shimonoseki combination of France, Russia, and Germany working together. But it all implied that Russia and Germany would compel France to give up her revanche, and thus submit Europe to German hegemony. There remained the Austro-Russian rivalry, but it seemed to have been losing its force since 1897. Influential Russian circles supported the idea of a continental coalition. For instance, Novoe Vremja considered England as Russia's traditional enemy, whose designs in Africa and in the Near, Middle, and Far East could be fought only by the combined efforts of the continental powers of Europe.128 The Russian conservatives would have dearly loved to have Imperial Germany as their ally against internal enemies as well as against England.129 The support of the Emperor William for the Emperor Nicholas ("Willy to Nicky" in their correspondence,) against the Yellow Peril was very much welcome to the latter, who was thus able to wallow in his personal imperialism in the Far East. Delcasse seems to have taken very seriously also the possibility of the Austrian empire dissolving, a situation in which Germany might buy Russia out of her French alliance with a large compensation from the Austrian heritage, as Moulin had written. That situation would be extremely dangerous, because the military convention would be dissolved ipso facto by the dissolving of the Triple Alliance.

128 Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE 1.V 1897. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 16 129 Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE 9.XI 1899. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 17 74 Delcasse travelled to Russia and discussed the situation with Nicholas and Murav'ev. There it turned out that the latter had not adopted the treacherous plans of the general staff. They agreed that the military convention was to last as long as the entente of 1891, i.e. as long as Russia's and France's interests were identical, independently of the existence of the Triple Alliance. The aim of the convention had been to maintain the general peace in Europe. Now Delcasse succeeded in including a paragraph where the aim was stated to be that of maintaining the balance of power in Europe. This was "a means of realizing France's wishes and hopes".130 Of course, leaving France without compensation if Germany got Austria and Russia got Galicia and the Straits would not have been "maintaining the balance of power". There was no other imaginable compensation for France but Alsace and Lorraine, "France's wishes and hopes". Another contingency discussed on Delcasse's visit was a war against England. She was not so dangerous as earlier, because of her entanglement in South Africa. But it was agreed that the Dual Alliance would also act in the event of a war against England. Thus the convention covered all possible combinations in Europe. A war against England implied action on the Russo-Indian border, too. Delcasse also discussed the principal military weakness of the convention. This was the fact that the first and decisive (as it was supposed to be) battle against 18 German and 2-4 Italian army corps was to be fought on the fourteenth day by the French, while the Russian contingent of 700 000 men would be ready to act at the earliest on the twenty-eighth day, when the decision in the west would already be past history. Delcasse urged the emperor to speed up the building of strategic railways from the interior of the empire to her western border in order to enable an earlier attack against Germany to be mounted.=31

130 Delcasse to the President of the Republic 12.VIII 1899. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 34 '31 "Note secrete sur les entretiens qui ont lieu entre l'Empereur de Russie et M.Delcasse 6.VIII 1899 et 25.IV 1901". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 35 75 3.10. Military Co-operation Promised

Reviewing the technical details of the military convention were left to the chiefs of the allied general staffs, Delanne and Saharov, in the summer of 1900.132 Now Saharov gave up a point which Obru6ev had defended tenaciously in 1892. The generals agreed that Italy and Austria were not as dangerous as had been thought in 1892. Austria had been weakened in consequence of her internal problems. Italy had to keep part of her army on her Austrian border, because of their mutual enmity. Thus the simultaneous mobilization by France and Russia was necessary only in case of a German mobilization or that of the whole of the Triple Alliance. But a partial or even a total mobilization by a lesser partner in the Triple Alliance, i.e. Italy or Austria, would now imply Franco-Russian mobilization only after further previous communications and agreement by the two signatories. Of course, this signified that France was not automatically going to support Russia against Austria in a Balkan conflict. The danger of a Franco-Italian conflict was receding as Italy's relations with her allies got cooler. It was difficult to integrate the military action of the allies. Delanne calculated that Germany would attack France with 18 army corps on the twelfth day supported by 2-4 Italian army corps on the eighteenth-twentieth days. Thus only five German corps with a few reserve divisions would be left against Russia. France was able to mobilize as fast as Germany. Thus the great decisive battle would be fought on the fifteenth-eighteenth day on the Franco-German frontier. If Russia remained passive, Germany would be free to leave only 2-3 army corps on her eastern border. In any case she was going to beat first France, and then transfer her forces to the east. Delanne asked Saharov to do his utmost to engage at least 5-6 German corps on the Russian frontier. In case of a German attack against Russia first, France on her part could promise to attack Germany with

132 "Revue de l'entretien du 2 juillet (19 juin) 1900 entre les chefs d'@tat-majors generaux des armees russe et francaise". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 35. DDF XVI/1 n:o 208

76 all vigour and all might, without thinking about the Italian danger. Saharov was satisfied with this promise, of course. But he was not able in his turn to give satisfaction to the French general. He admitted the probability of a German attack in the west, because France could be beaten decisively in one battle, while Russia was so large that Germany had no hope of a speedy decision on her eastern front. But the western attack was by no means a certainty. Germany had numerous strategic railways running towards her eastern border, and there was the necessity of helping Austria against Russia. Therefore Russia had to be prepared for an attack of 14 army corps from East Prussia, and two army corps from Silesia, in addition to the 14 Austrian army corps. — This hypothesis left only seven German corps against France. — Russia had to maintain a strictly defensive attitude until she saw that the Germans had adopted the first hypothesis, the attack against France. Then, on the twenty-eighth day, she would have the promised 700 000 men mobilized and concentrated for an attack. Delanne remarked that the Germans, after having beaten the French, would thus have ten days to transfer their troops to the east. On the twenty-eighth day the Russians were not to have five or six corps against them but four, six, or eight additional corps from the west. Russia had better attack at once after ascertaining that the German attack was directed towards the west and destroy the German troops on the frontier with the forces she might have available, without waiting for the concentration of her whole army. Delanne also said that France would be "completely satisfied" if Russia could improve her railways in order to speed up her troop concentrations. A new aspect, which had not been discussed in 1892, was the eventual enmity of England. It was agreed that Russia was to put pressure against Afghanistan or India. She was not able to reinforce her troops in Central Asia enough for serious action, but the pressure would be enough to prevent England from transporting her Indian army to fight against France. After the Russian railway network was connected to the Transcaspian railway, Russia would be able to concentrate 300 000-350 000 men against India in six weeks. France, on her part, could exert pressure by concentrating 100 000-150 000 men on the 77 Channel coast, which would prevent England from sending her home troops to India. If the Triple Alliance should join England in a war against the Dual Alliance, these pressures were to remain, but in a weakened form, of course. Only the local Russian troops on the Afghan border would be available for pressure on India. France would be able to concentrate an equal number, but of colonial troops, on her Channel coast. The principal enemy would be Germany, as in a war against the Triple Alliance alone. Next year, 1901, Saharov discussed the identical problems with a new partner, General Pendezec — French politics and the Dreyfus affair consumed military chiefs in a rapid succession. The French general, as always, asked Russia to help France by drawing enough of the German army corps from the western frontier to give France a chance of success in the decisive battle which was to be fought starting on the fourteenth day. The Russian vanguard should attack on the fourteenth day and engage at least 6-7 German corps. It was of key importance for the French to receive good news from the east on the fourteenth day, news of a Russian attack even if not of a Russian victory. That would be important for French morale, especially if France were to lose the first battle. Pendezec also remarked how desirable it would be if the great Russian attack discussed in 1892 could be advanced ten days. Saharov answered that he would take notice of the French wishes in his planning work. Perhaps the Russian vanguard would be able to start its action on the eighteenth day, and the mass of 700 000 men promised in 1892 might be concentrated on the twenty-eighth day to take the offensive against Germany. But beginning the action on the fourteenth day and advancing the principal offensive ten days was possible only if the Russian railways were to be improved. The work would take two years and would impose a great strain on Russian finances. Pendezec answered that the matter was of such importance for France's future that the French minister for foreign affairs was prepared to discuss with his Russian colleague the financial combinations to enable Russia to build the necessary railways in the near future.

78 France on her part was to fulfil everything promised in the previous discussion. The action taken by the French forces would be even more vigorous than previously supposed because of the progress in the development of her armed forces. The generals agreed once more that the defeat of Germany was the primary objective even if the war was made necessary by German ambitions on some Austro-Hungarian provinces. There was not much new to be added to the discussion regarding an eventual war against England. Saharov only emphasized that it was only after the completion of the Orenburg-Tashkent line that Russia would be able to concentrate 300 000 men to menace British India. Until that time the pressure on the Afghan borders would be much less imposing. Pendezec answered that France, too, held the completion of the Orenburg-Tashkent line to be important. Saharov promised that the work would start next spring, that part of the rolling stock had already been ordered and that the trace of the line had already been measured out.'33 Delcasse did not leave the revitalised military convention resting only on the discussions between the chiefs of staff. He revisited Nicholas II and extracted from the emperor a promise that Russia would build the railway lines which Saharov held essential for the simultaneous attack of Russia and France.'3} The military convention was also ratified by an exchange of letters between Delcasse and Lamsdorff, Nicholas's new minister for foreign affairs.'33 Next year, 1902, Saharov promised to Pendezec that Russia would construct the line Orenburg-Tashkent (1881 kilometres) and Bologoe-Sedlec (1100 kilometres) by 1905 and 1906. (map 17) 136 Pendezec visited Russia again in 1903 and was told by Nicholas II that his first troops would be ready on the tenth day. It was probable that three-quarters or four-fifths of the German corps would attack France, but Nicholas stressed that

'33 "Proces-verbal de l'entretien du 8/21 fevrier 1901 entre les chefs d'état- major generaux des armees russe et fransaise". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 35. DDF I/2 n:o 112 134 Delcasse to Lamsdorff 16/3.V 1901. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 35 135 Lamsdorff to Delcasse 16/3.V 1901. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 35 136 Saharov to Pendezec 31.II 1902. EMATSH 7 N 1507 79 there was no certainty of it. Russia would be able to undertake the promised offensive only after it was definitely known that the mass of the German forces was turned towards the west. Saharov explained that the first Russian troops would be detrained on the tenth day and ready to fight on the twelfth day. The first echelon was to consist of 350 000 men. Thus considerable progress had been realized since the chiefs of staff had started their annual conferences. And when the railway from Bologoe to Sedlec were completed, the echelons would consist of 100 000 additional men. Pendezec composed a report on these talks that was quite optimistic. Little by little the desired objective was being attained: cannon would be heard simultaneously from the west and from the east. He supposed that the Russians were going to attack the Germans at once, but he had refrained from asking any details: "they were to be dealt with by the eventual commanders in chief". — This was a bit odd, because the conferences of the chiefs of staff had been organized in order to concert measures and preparations in order to enable immediate and simultaneous action in case of Germany's attack, when no further conferring by the commanders in chief would be possible, nor was indeed foreseen in the convention. Further on we shall see that subsequent Russian chiefs of staff thought that Saharov had promised more than Russia was able to perform and thus Pendezec seems to have been overly optimistic. Pendezec was given the general lines of Saharov's plans, which had not been much changed since previous years (as described in the chapter above). It was supposed that the Germans would concentrate 6-7 corps in East Prussia, while the Austrians would attack with 5-6 corps from Przemysl to Volynia and with 7-8 corps from Galicia to Poland. The Russians had their first or Niemen army facing the Prussian frontier and the second army on the Narew and the Vistula. (map 18). Their reserve was between the Narew and the Bug armies. There was an army facing the Austrians in the Bug- Lublin region and another army in the south-west. One army was to watch the Rumanians. The expeditionary corps was preparing for the invasion of Turkey over the Black Sea. Pendezec thought that it was easy for the Russians to attack in the north if they had their 350 000 men concentrated on the

80 5 tenth day, while the Germans were to have their 250 000 men ready on the fourteenth day. The Niemen army was to crush the German left flank, while the Narew army was to attack Allenstein. Thus the Germans would be compelled to evacuate East Prussia and to retreat to the Vistula. But by then the Russians would have their full force available, which meant a triple superiority over the Germans. Thus they would be able to take the route to Berlin, having only the decrepit fortress of Custrin in front of them. This operation could not be disturbed by what happened in the south. The Austrians would not be ready for action until the twenty-second day, and by then Dragomirov would have attacked them. Nor would the Germans be able to help the Austrians, being in battle since twelfth day. These plans presupposed that the principal German armies were concentrated in the west. If Germany left only 6-7 corps in Alsace-Lorraine, she could attack Russia with 32 (Austrian and German) corps. Then Russia could only defend herself in Poland. t31 Therefore it was of vital importance to know at the very moment of the declaration of war whether the Germans were going to attack in the east or in the west. It was urgently necessary to have reliable means of communication between the two general staffs. But there the difficulties were so great that the problem took several years to be solved. — This will be dealt with in a chapter of its own. Thus Pendezec's report would have been quite cloudless but for his discussions with Kuropatkin, which already cast a small shadow of the troubles that were in fact waiting in the very near future. The minister of war had visited Japan. He told Pendezec that his visit had convinced him that a war with Japan would be costly, inglorious, and futile. His pessimistic report had not pleased the emperor and his position was shaky. Far East policy had been transferred to the charge of Admiral Alexeev. It was rumoured that Saharov had been designated Kuropatkin's successor.'38

137 "Rapport du General Pendezec, Chef d'Etat-Major General de 1'Armee au Ministre de la Guerre sur sa Mission en Russie, Manoeuvres de Pskov, Aout 1903". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. DDF III/2, annexe IV 138 = 137

6 — French information on ... 81 4. Adventure and Defeat

4.1. Far Eastern Schemes

Russia's attention had begun to turn towards the Far East seriously after 1895 when her advance in Central Asia had been stopped. The realization of the dreams of Russia's manifest destiny in Asia was being made possible in direct relation to the progress made in the building of Witte's Siberian railway (started in 1891). Russia stepped into the Far East political arena together with France and Germany in 1895, chasing Japan back from her Chinese conquests. Witte had thought of a peaceful economic infiltration of the Far East in harmony with China. A treaty of friendship had been concluded in 1896, allowing Witte to build the Siberian railway through Manchuria towards Vladivostok. But the temptation for an imperialism of the older military model was too strong. The peninsula of Liaotung was occupied in 1898 and Port Arthur was established as the Russian port at warm sea that the landlocked empire had sought for since the days of Peter the Great. Then the Boxer rebellion gave Russia a new challenge. The French ambassador reported: "The Russian press rejoices over the disorder in China. They see the anarchy as harming the interests of other powers, which is advantageous to Russia. Because Russia has provinces on the Chinese border, she will able to occupy Chinese territory and then, under the protection of her troops, she will be able 82 to develop these areas when the Siberian railway is completed. Of all the Christian nations Russia has the best chance of creating cordial relations with the Asiatics, because of her gentleness with these peoples, who are treated with little ceremony by other civilized nations".i39 The Amur and Siberian military districts were mobilized in the summer of 1900 because of the Chinese disorders.140 These troops consisted of the first Siberian corps in Pecili and Port Arthur, the second corps in Harbin, and the third corps at Sretensk. At Vladivostok a landing force was being prepared. These troops numbered 172 000 men; in addition there were 62 500 men not included in the army corps.'°' Moulin reported that this number was double that of the pre-crisis effectives.'42 A strong Russian detachment took part in the relief of Peking, and after that the Russians remained in the Manchurian areas through which they had marched. "The military situation in Manchuria is seen only as a pretext for the Russian occupation (by outsiders), but in fact the occupation is necessary because the population is terrorized by the Hunhuzes in bands of up to one thousand, armed with cannons". Also Chinese troops were reported on the Manchurian border.1S3 Of course it would have been inadmissible to let the Chinese pacify their provinces: and very probably they would not have been able to do it. Thus, apparently, it was all right for the Russians to show their consideration towards the local population. It is well known that Witte opposed this policy of violence, nor did Kuropatkin like turning Russia's forces away from the menaced western frontier. As far as he was able to do so, the

139 Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE 9.XI 1900. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 17 14° "Mesures militaires en Chine". Moulin 25.VI 1900. EMATSH 7 N 1476 141 "Composition des troupes concentrees en Extreme-Orient". Moulin 7.VIII 1900. EMATSH 7 N 1476 142 "Sur les forces qui seront maintenus en Extreme-Orient". Moulin 15.I 1901. EMATSH 7 N 1476 143 "Situation militaire en Mandchourie". Moulin 25.III 1902. EMATSH 7 N 1476 83 minister for foreign affairs, Count Lamsdorff, supported Witte's opposition. Moulin reported how Witte was overthrown by the united efforts of Plehwe, state secretaty Bezobrazov, and Admiral Alexeev, backed by Grand Duke Alexander Mihailovic.

Plehwe is supposed to have supported the Far Eastern adventure out of opportunism, i.e. because he knew that it pleased the emperor, but also because he wanted to distract the malcontents "with a little victorious war", or because of his rivalry with Witte. Bezobrazov, Alexeev, and Alexander Mihailovic were members of the notorious court clique which Nicholas II had collected around him and which was forming an alternative government.

Moulin continued that the Grand Duke would probably soon be called to direct the projected ministry of commerce and industry. Not being able, as a grand duke, to be appointed minister, he would lead the ministry through a combination resembling that with which the Grand Duke Aleksei (Grand Admiral of the Fleet) actually directed the navy, i.e. through an acting Navy minister. There had also been a proposal for the creation of a ministry of colonies for Bezobrazov.144 Of these possible combinations the only one that materialized was the appointment of Admiral Alexeev as viceroy. In this way Far Eastern policy was detached from the competence of the responsible ministries in St. Petersburg. But Moulin knew also that the Far Eastern adventure was not caused solely by the nefarious influence of the court clique. It was the result of the personal policy of the emperor. He had always been interested in Asian schemes of aggrandizment. As a young man, Nicholas had visited Japan and had been president of the committee for the Siberian railway. His policy was not the result of Bezobrazov's influence. The state secretary had simply been able to make himself an advocate of a policy that was in reality the synthesis of the sovereign's

144 "Le remaniement ministeriel en Russie". Moulin 5.XI 1903. EMATSH 7 N 1506 84 secret desires.145 Japan saw Russia threatening her schemes in the neighbouring countries. She tried to protest against Russia's permanent occupation of Manchuria and her encroachment on Korea, but in vain. Then Japan found a friend in England, who viewed the naval situation on the Pacific with concern: the growing Russian squadron there was threatening England's naval supremacy, while Russia's Manchurian policy seemed a menace to England's commercial preponderance in China. Thus England gave up her "splendid isolation" and concluded with Japan a treaty of neutrality (in the event of either party getting involved in a war with a third power) or mutual help (in the event of there being more than one enemy, i.e. if France joined Russia). This was irritating for Russia, but it did not make her renounce her Far Eastern schemes. The end of the South African War also caused a painful feeling and a sentiment of irritation in Russia. In St. Petersburg people had got into the habit of thinking that the war would go on for ever, swallowing up endless thousands of soldiers and millions of pounds, thus exhausting England. The Russians were angry with the Boers for giving up their fight, because then the English were free to paralyze Russia's freedom of action in Suez, in Persia, in China, in Afghanistan, etc.146 But this was only an irritation, and it caused no voluntary abandonment of the forward movement in the Far East. As mentioned earlier, Kuropatkin visited Japan in 1903 and returned from there with the idea that the country was powerfully armed and that a war was inevitable if some concessions were not made. But Bezobrazov persuaded the Tsar that Russia had no need to be afraid of Japan. Nicholas answered that there would be no war because he did not want — Such an attitude undoubtedly rested on the assumption that because the Japanese were a coloured people, it was unthinkable that they would dare to oppose Russia, a great power and a white, "Christian" colonial power.

145 "Coup d'oeil d'ensemble sur la situation generale". Moulin 6.X 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476 146 "Les Russes et la fin de la guerre Sud-Africaine". Moulin 9.VI 1902. EMATSH 7 N 1506 14' Rapport sur un voyage execute en Russie Juin-Aoüt 1904 par le Chef d'esca- dre Fraenkel". EMATSH 7 N 1485 85 Japan was reported to be mobilizing at the end of 1903, but Manchuria was not evacuated by the Russians. Nicholas told his ministers that this would not happen, and ordered them to find a modus vivendi with other powers to avoid the "continuous complaints" of these powers'4e — an impossible task because nothing was to be given up. On the contrary, the forward policy was pressed on in Korea. Grand Duke Alexander and Bezobrazov did not consent to giving up their planned settlement of 200 000 people at the mouth of the Yalu river. This was seen as a commercially advantageous enterprise but also as an advantageous bridgehead for Russia on the Korean frontier. Bezobrazov demanded troops from Kuropatkin for this imperialistic enterprise. This Kuropatkin refused for fear of the Japanese reaction. Kuropatkin was very pessimistic because his warnings were not heeded.'}9 As mentioned earlier, the emperor was displeased with Kuropatkin, and also with Lamsdorf whom he reproached for the failure of all negotiations with the Japanese. By the beginning of 1904 the ominous fact was known that Japan had got her finances in order with loans on the home and American market — the American Jewish bankers detested Russia's anti-semitic policy.'"

4.2. Russias's Strength Disappears to the Far East

The situation had seemed comparatively tranquil in 1902. Only a little over 100 000 men had stood under arms then in the Far East.'" But as the tension grew, reinforcements were sent to the Far East, 127 000 men by October 1903, and an additional

148 "Le Mandchourie ne sera pas evacue" Moulin 20.IX 1903. Moulin 20.IX 1903. EMATSH 7 N 1476 tae "Preparatifs de descente au Japon". Moulin 30.IX-9.X 1903. EMATSH 7 N 1476 ='0 "Les evenements d'Extreme-Orient". Moulin 29.I 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1506

86 150 000 were to be sent during the next two to three months. Both General Saharov on the general staff and Admiral Avellan on the naval staff affirmed to Moulin that all necessary precautions had been taken and that Russia was well prepared for any attack by Japan.152 The preparations were not as effective and energetic as the officers declared. In their view, the Japanese would not, of course, dare to attack Russia. "Admiral Alexeev in an official report declared categorically that the Pacific squadron was too powerful to fear defeat in a battle against the Japanese, which confirmed the government in their naive (this report was given in 1906 and by then it was seen to have been naive) confidence that there would be no war".153 Alexeev was reported to be convinced of the futility of concessions, which in his view would only encourage Japan to increase her demands. She would not be content with Korea only; she would demand Manchuria if Russia did not stand up to her. In any case humouring Japan only was of no use, since Japanese intransigance was caused by English intrigue. The best way of easing the Far Eastern situation was to threaten the Afghan borders. Colonel Vannovskii, the military attaché in Japan, was also disposed to judge the Japanese army severely. The success of the expeditionary corps to China (in 1900, when the Japanese had killed Chinese as effectively as the European soldiers did) was deceptive. The cream of the Japanese army had been skimmed to form the corps. He considered the Japanese very

15' Effectives in the Asian military districts 1902 spring 1903 Caucasian military district 102,250 Turkestan military district 53,309 Siberian military district 13,217 Amur military district 65,710 66,500 Province of Kwang-Tung 15,207 17,000 Railway guard in Manchuria 25,000 26,000 "Effectifs des troupes russes dans les circonscriptions militaires de la Russie d'Asie". Moulin 5.VII 1903. EMATSH 7 N 1476 152 "Situation en extreme-orient". Moulin 20.X 1903. EMATSH 7 N 1476 153 "Critique du general Martynoff". Moulin 16.XII 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477 87 obtuse and capable of conceiving rather odd ideas. Moulin gathered from Vannovskil's comments that in the event of a war the Russians intended to invade Korea.155 By this time the Russian general staff seems to have become rather eager for a Far Eastern war — which might explain why Nicholas II favoured Saharov. The general staff thought that the Manchurian railway or the lines connecting it with China proper could not be allowed to fall under Japanese or English domination. Neither could the Japanese be allowed to have the southern tip of Korea, because in Japanese or other enemy hands it would be a new Gibraltar closing the approaches to Vladivostok. Thus no new Japanese troops could be admitted to Korea. Japan might be given economic concessions there, but even so the forests and mines of northern Korea were to be exploited by Russia. The general staff was planning the transport of the tenth and eighteenth army corps to the Far East.156 The reinforcement mentioned above seem to have been the thirty-first and thirty- fifth divisions of the eighteenth corps. These corps had been part of the armies which were intended to fight the Austrians, but since the agreement of 1903 on the Balkan status quo there was "no reason" to keep these troops in the west.157 Thus it seems that even if the Tsar was pacific and his minister for war apprehensive, his general staff was not. On the contrary, it welcomed a war which to it seemed easy and gave promise of new areas falling under Russian domination. (The grandeur of its appetites should be clear enough now bearing in mind its earlier plans for carving up the Emperor Francis Joseph's heritage). Moulin does not seem to have known of the plans made in 1898 and revised in 1901 for a war against Japan. After a defensive phase, while a sufficient number of troops were being concentrated, Korea was to be invaded and after that a landing to be made in Japan — for which a landing corps was being prepared in Vladivostok — and in Japan the decisive victory

155 "Conversation avec l'attache militaire russe au Japon". Noulin 10.IV 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476 156 "Sur les affaires d'extreme-Orient". Moulin 30.XI 1903. EMATSH 7 N 1476 157 Moulin to war minister 25.VI 1903. EMATSH 7 N 1476 88 was to be won.1J8 There was no reason for the French to rejoice. Moulin reminded General Saharov of his promise to have the Orenburg-Tashkent and Sedlec-Bologoe railways built, and calculated that 6,3 million roubles would be enough for it. But Saharov said that at least 11 million roubles would be necessary but was not available, because the preparations in the Far East absorbed all funds. Moulin was desolate on thus learning that the completion of the strategic lines, on which depended the possibility, vital for France, of a Russian offensive against Germany at an early moment, was in danger of being retarded. "This offensive, readiness for which the Russian general staff virtually, even though vaguely, promised in 1902 and in explicit and precise terms in 1903 ... shall it again be adjourned ad calendas graecas? Happily, Saharov is the best minister of war from our point of view, a man with whom it is easy to reach a mutual understanding. But it is not certain that he is influential enough in the decisions of the Russian government to ensure the triumph of truth and honesty, without a new démarche by the French government".'" The cause of truth and honesty was also threatened by the danger of an Anglo-French conflict in consequence of the war between their allies. Yet there was less of a chance of a succesful battle against England than during the Fashoda crisis. The only area where the British empire could effectively be threatened was the Russo-Indian border. But Russia was not able to concentrate more than 75 000-80 000 men there before the Orenburg-Tashkent railway was completed. Only then could a really dangerous attack of 300 000-350 000 men be launched. But the railway was far from complete. France had spared neither demarches nor money; her ambassador, her chief of general staff, her minister

158 Istorija russko-japonskoi voiny 1904-1905 gg. Ed.I.I. Rostunov. AN SSSR & Institut voennoi istorii Ministerstva oborony SSSR. Moskva 1977. p. 93- 159 "Conversation avec le general Sakharof sur les chemins de fer d'Oranienbourg-Tachkent et Siedletz-Bologoe". Moulin 10.IV 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 37 89 for foreign affairs had supported the Russian minister for foreing affairs and general staff in their battle against Witte's opposition. But the minister of finance had delayed the Orenburg-Tashkent railway; he had even transferred part of the money and men to the Siberian railway, and consequently the Central Asian railway could be completed in 1905 at the earliest. Thus the whole burden of a war against England had to be carried alone by France.160 Moulin saw the situation in the same light as previously and was consistent in his calculations. But of course he was not quite up to date. Delcasse in Paris had seen that the eleven millions for the Orenburg-Tashkent and Bologoe-Sedlec railway were not enough to secure France's position. By no means could France continue to be an enemy of England when Russia disappeared as a counterweight to the German menace. Delcasse concluded that the only means of avoiding an entanglement with England was to enter into an entente with her, forgetting all ancient colonial disputes. The British statesmen in their turn were worried lest their alliance with Japan, aimed at consolidating the naval position on the Pacific and in China, would drag them into a war which would be much more difficult than the South African War, and with the growing menace of German naval might looming in the background. An Entente Cordial would remove all danger of a Franco-English conflict, and this was achieved in 1904.

4.3. The Defeat of an Ally

The Japanese crippled the Russian Pacific fleet by a surprise attack (27.I/9.II 1904). After that it was easy for them to maintain their armies in Manchuria. Port Arthur was invested and the Russian army thrown back in the Battle of Laojan (July—August). Port Arthur could not be relieved (October

160 Moulin to war minister to MAE 12.II 1904. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S.17 90 1904) and capitulated (20.XII 1904/2.I 1905). After that the Russians lost the Battle of Mukden (February/March 1905). Their last hope was the Baltic fleet, which was sent half way round the world to be defeated at the Battle of Tsushima (15/ 28.V 1905).161 The course of the war and the subsequent revolution is too well known to be told here in any more detail, even though General Silvestre, detached by the French general staff to follow the Russian army, sent in plenty of interesting information. Moulin continued reporting from St. Petersburg. His despatches do not give any coherent picture of the Russian mobilization's' because it was not a coherent affair. "Dragomirov and Saharov blame the improvisations of Kuropatkin, who has collected detachments from various troops and has not sent the existing units to the Far East".163 At first it seemed that starting the war had given rise to the usual national enthusiasm164 (although it is to be noted that Moulin discussed with officers but only observed the rank and file, who seemed to be "in admirably good humour"). But even so the war was not satisfactory from the French point of view because it freed the Germans from the Russian military menace. "If the effectives of the Russian garrisons on her western frontier have not yet been reduced (July 1904) in spite of the Emperor William's undisguised incitement, at least the modern artillery has been taken out of Poland to be replaced with cannon of an old model, which has proved inadequate in the operations in Manchuria and which would be quite useless in a European war".16'

:61 There is no end of literature concerning the war. Istorija russko-japon- skoi ... includes a concise bibliography. 162 "Mise en etat de defense des tötes de la Baltique". Moulin 8.III 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476 "Desorganisation cause par les renforts envoyés en Mandchourie". Moulin 10.III 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476 1"; "Etat moral de l'armee russe". Moulin 10.III 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476 1" Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE 2/15.VII 1904. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 17 91 By the autumn of 1904 the Far Eastern army consisted of ten army corps and more were being sent to form at least three armies. Kuropatkin had been sent plenty of artillery projectiles, but three-fourths of them had been consumed during the first great Battle of Laojan; the magazines of the Warsaw military district were exhausted and the commanding-general there said that they had nothing to shoot with should the Austrians or Germans cross the frontier. Casualties in the Far East also amounted to more than expected. These were not merely battle casualties, but were also due to disease.166 It was also noted that "the Russian infantry tactics do not correspond to the demands of modern war ... Deceived by the success of 1812 Russia has not noticed the necessity of abandoning ancient errors as did other armies in the way shown by Napoleon. The tactics of the last century served well in the wars against the Caucasians, Turks, Turkmens — valorous enemies without doubt, but inferior from the tactical point of view.167 ... Tactics consisted only of shooting, with the expectation that in the end the Russians, being more numerous, would remain alone in Manchuria".168 For the disorder of the Russian organization Kuropatkin was blamed: "He dismembered all great organic units in order to create detachments for all of his friends ... (There was a) continuous changing of resolutions and dispositions, which led to the disorganization of all branches of the service ..."'69 The Russian army not only disappeared from the German border to the Far East. It got disorganized, it was bled white, it lost its material, it suffered defeat, and lost all military value in the end.

1e6 "Effectifs de 1'armee de Mandchourie 26.XI 1904". Moulin 30.XI 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476 167 "Lettre particuliere de g'al Silvestre" 30.XI 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476 168 "Lettre particuliere de g'al Silvestre" 26.XII 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476 16s "Au sujet de deilx lettres du generaux Jilinsky et Bilderling". Moulin 5.X 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476 92 The voyage of the Baltic fleet brought nearer also the danger of an Anglo-Russian conflict. The British navy followed closely the heroes of the North Sea incident, and the Russians took military precautionary measures in the Transcaspian district.i70 By French mediation the North Sea incident was smoothed over so as not to give the German emperor the chance of realizing his dream of a Russo-German alliance and forcing France to accept German hegemony. The Emperor William eagerly supported the voyage: Hapag steamers carried — English! — coal for the Tsar's warships. And France had to allow them to utilize her ports or anchorages in the colonies — in spite of Japanese protests — in order to save the Dual Alliance in the face of competition from the Kaiser's gestures of friendship.171 As mentioned earlier, the Entente Cordiale eliminated the danger of a Franco-English conflict. But France's relations with Japan were rather tense. And her friendship with both Russia and England, who had been enemies for a long time, left her in a "delicate" situation vis-a-vis Russia. In Russia there were "certain chauvinistic elements who might turn inaccessible to all sensible arguments and very accessible to insinuations aiming at the dissolving of the Franco-Russian alliance".'T Soon it was reported that the Russian civilians were repeating that "this is said to be a war with the objective of reaching an outlet for Russia to a sea free from ice, but in reality it is only a war for the profit of Grand Dukes and persons in high places, while the costs it causes are burdening the people, who are already poor enough without them".'"

1i0 Moulin to war minister 5.XI 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476 17' This has been admirably studied by Ohto Manninen, The Second Russian Pacific Squadron and French Neutrality. Problems during the Russo- Japanese War 1904-1905. Archivum Historicum 68, edidit Societas Histo- rica Finlandiae, Helsinki 1975, p. 91-209. " "Envoi d'une note secrete relative au cas d'intervention de l'Angleterre dans le conflit russo-japonais". Moulin 12.II 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476 173 "Rapport sur un voyage execute en Russie en Juin-Aout 1904 par chef d'escadre Fraenkel". EMATSH 7 N 1485 93 The military tried to put on a brave face. Saharov was "not at all disturbed" by the North Sea incident1~4 and when Port Arthur fell, he said that it had stood longer than expected.15 Like all other "serious" men in high places, he did not, after Mukden, admit any other solution but continuing the war — on the condition of Kuropatkin's dismissal176 — in spite of the fact that the internal situation in Russia threatened the conduct of the war.177 Kuropatkin was dismissed,1i8 but only beaten scraps of the army were left for his successor Linevi6.179 The Battle of Tsushima was "a day of heroism in respect of which the army, the navy, and the entire nation expected an explanation with a profound dolour".180 The explanation was, of course, the inability of the rusty Russian system to organize a modern war, an explanation which the nation in its revolutionary movement seemed to assume. But still the general staff persisted. The ninth, twelfth, nineteenth and twenty-first army corps were mobilized in order to be transported to the east.181 In spite of Roosevelt's offer of mediation and Nicholas's acceptance of it, Saharov persisted in his opinion that the war was to be continued.182 In fact, Linevic's army grew numerically very strong, but still unable to attack. The Japanese were also exhausted by their succesful operations, and thus no great battle ensued.183 Moulin concluded his war-time reports by saying that the Russian soldier did not deserve any reproach, although the men

174 "Conversation avec le general Sakharoff". Moulin 5.XI 1904. EMATSH 7 N 1476 175 "Impression produite dans les spheres militaires par la chute de Porth Arthur". Moulin 10.I 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 176 "Situation general de la guerre". Moulin 28.I 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 i7' "Courant d'opinion en faveur de la paix". Moulin 25.II 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 178 "Sur le remplacement du General Kouropatkine". Moulin 20.III 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 179 "Au sujet des pertes de 1'armee de Mandchourie". Moulin 20.III 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 "Situation general de 1'armee de Mandchourie". Moulin 4.IV 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 180 "Opinion de l'etat-major russe sur la bataille de Tsou-shima". Moulin 2.VI 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 181 "Sitation de Guerre". Moulin 10.VII 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 182 "Au sujet des bruits de paix et de la continuation de la guerre". Moulin 15.VI 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 183 "Situation de Guerre". Moulin 1.VII 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 94 on active service were incomparably better than the reservists, and the militia battalions were very feebly trained. The reserve officers had not been good leaders because of their lack of instruction. The professional officers had been distinguished by their self-denial, bravery, and devotion, but also by their lack of initiative, comprehension of the situation, and decision. The general backwardness of Russia had naturally been reflected in both the soldiers and the officers. The worst mistake in the conduct of operations had been the improvisation of the various detachments, which had ruptured the established organization. A remarkable fact about the war was the enormous consumption of ammunition. For instance, 138 regiments had consumed 1 920 730 cartridges in a battle of five days (30.IX- 4.X 1904). But the conclusion of a study of artillery, cavalry, and infantry action during the war showed that there had emerged nothing to shake the established bases of conducting battle. As always, rifle and cannon fire were there only for the purpose of sweeping the road free for the bayonet, which completed the bloody work.184 — This conclusion was shaken only by several years of slaughter in the great war in 1914- 1917. "The enormous consumption of ammunition" was also to cause a fresh surprise in the autumn of 1914. With the wisdom of hindsight it is easy to be ironical about this military conservatism, but the burden of tradition was not easy to abandon. Nor was it easy to reinvigorate the Russian system.

4.4. Changes in Russian Government and Politics

The Peace of Portsmouth was an unexpected success for Russia because Japan's victories had exhausted her, too. Russia lost

184 "Enseignements de la Guerre de Mandchourie par le Colonel A Petat-major Niezhamoff, 23. division, xvii corps d'armee". EMATSH 7 N 1477 "Suite des enseignements de la guerre par le LtCol Niezaemoff". Moulin 2.I 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477

95 her conquests and Sakhalin, i.e. all dreams of a dominating position in the Pacific region. But she did not lose any of her own territory, the Manchurian railway remained under Russian control, and an indemnity to Japan was masked as a payment for the upkeep of Russian prisoners of war in Japan. Consequently, the imperialist party in Japan was not satisfied, and for a few years Russo-Japanese relations remained tense. Internal troubles, disorders, strikes, mutinies and jacqueries compelled the Tsar to renounce his autocracy in October 1905. The Duma, a legislative organ, was established in 1906. Too many unruly democrats were brought in by the first experiments, and a new electoral law which favoured the well- to-do classes was promulgated in 1907. Witte had negotiated the tolerable peace at Portsmouth. Then he was appointed prime minister and led the suppression of the Moscow rebellion in December 1905 and started negotiations on a French loan to reconstruct Russia's finances. He was too much of a success for Nicholas II and was dismissed in the spring of 1906. For a moment it seemed possible that democratic elements might be recruited in the government, but in the end "bonapartism" was accepted as a better alternative: Stolypin's programme was the suppression of popular movements but also reforms in agriculture, industrial relations, and in the administration. A restricted parliamentarism was combined with the Tsar's autocracy. A patriotic policy guaranteed Stolypin the support of the Russian nationalists, as well as the opposition of the left and the hatred of the national minorities. Foreign policy, directed by Izvol'skii, aimed at external peace to ensure internal reforms. The high command of the armed forces was reorganized, too. The army was administered by the war ministry, led by General Roediger. But the general staff under General Palicyn was made independent, on the German model. A naval general staff was established, but much was left to be reformed later in the naval administration. A Committee of Imperial Defence was created under the presidency of Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevic to unite the various military and naval offices. From that ensued the advantage that the Grand Duke, designated wartime commander-in-chief, grew acquainted with the planning and preparation for the war that he was expected to lead. But it seems that the system did not work well; the

96 6 services were not succesfully integrated. In 1909 the military command was again centred in the war ministry under Suhomlinov, the new minister. Nikolai Nikolaevie served further as a commander of the Guards and of the St. Petersburg military district, always as the designated commander-in-chief. Nicholas II nursed a secret wish of taking the command himself. He was persuaded to give up this dream in 1914, but in 1915 he dismissed his uncle and took command, with no propitious consequences for the dynasty or empire. In the summer of 1905 Germany tried to take advantage of Russia's weakness and break up the recent entente of France and England. The Kaiser visited Tangier and thereby demonstrated Germany's interest in Morocco. Delcasse would have opposed the German demands, trusting to British support, but the French government was scared of Germany and let Delcasse fall. An international conference was set up to disentangle the Moroccan question. The Kaiser used France's compliance as a proof that the time for concluding the continental coalition against England had come. Nicholas was irritated because of England's renewed relations with Japan and signed. But the Russian statesmen, Witte and Lamsdorf, explained that an alliance with Germany could not be reconciled with the Dual Alliance without France's previous concert. And France did not consent. Against German expectation, England firmly supported the French monopoly in Morocco. Russia, too, had to support her ally at the conference because she needed a giant loan to revive her finances after war and revolution, and only France was able to furnish the money. The Dual Alliance thus survived this crisis. In order to avoid further complications on the Asian confines, Russia renounced her dreams of conquest and made an entente with England in 1907. She gave up Tibet, left Afghanistan in England's sphere of interest, and consented to carving up Persia into zones of interest. England gave unwritten, uncertain promises of support in the Straits question. At the same time the rivalry with Japan was buried. And in 1910 a hesitating first step towards a renewed imperialism in the Far East was taken when a Russo-Japanese agreement was made, which left Korea in Japan's and Mongolia in Russia's

7 — French information on . . 97 sphere of interest. In 1907 Izvol'skii tried to soothe German susceptibilities with a proposal for closing the Baltic Sea against English influence.ln By the end of 1907 Izvol'skii had disentangled Russia from the mess that her Asian aspirations had led her into. The external peace necessary for the internal reforms seemed to be assured.

4.5. Powerless Russia

Defeat and revolution made Russia militarily powerless. When the Moroccan crisis was at its worst, the new Russian chief of general staff Palicyn declared that three years would be needed from the end of the war to rebuild Russia's military might in the west. She was not in a position to furnish any appreciable support in the event of a war between Germany and France. "Our magazines in Poland are empty, we have no projectiles for our cannons. If we have a conflict with Germany, there is nothing else to do but to kneel down and beg for mercy".'86 The end of the Far Eastern war did not make things much easier for Russia: "She has to face a new military situation in the Far East. Her troops have to be reorganized in Asia, in Turkestan, in western and eastern Siberia, in order to be able to withstand the renewed Anglo-Japanese alliance . Palicyn will not renounce adventurism in Asia nor does he concentrate on reconstituting the military position on the European frontier, where complications may appear at any moment.

185 Pertti Luntinen, The Baltic Question 1903-1908, Suomalaisen Tiede- akatemian toimituksia B 195, Helsinki 1975, deals with Russo-German relations during this time. 186 "Situation de l'armee russe dans l'hypothese d'un conflit avec l'Allemagne". Moulin 27.VI 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477

98 The Council of Imperial Defence, realising the Emperor William's dreams, is hypnotized by Asia and seeks for a combination that would enable Russia to face the Japanese in eastern Siberia and the English on the borders of Afghanistan and India". Palicyn said to Moulin: "Our situation in Asia is very bad ... The Anglo- Japanese treaty cannot leave us cold ... this treaty is an infamy". And, what was worse, Palicyn was taken in by the German emperor's plan of a continental coalition against the island naval powers: "William II is a man who sees the problem from a high and broad point of view ..." Moulin said that the subject was a bit frightening one for a mere military attaché to get involved with, but he had let Palicyn talk in order to learn whether Germany had proposed something to the Russian general staff. "Palicyn is such a wily Jesuit father ..."187 The continental coalition was of course no chimaera; there were plenty of grounds for such a combination. The alliances of the First World War were in no way preordained, but were the result of a long series of events. The French had good reason to be worried about the support for a German orientation in conservative and military circles in Russia, where there was much opposition to Izvol'skii's new course. Nor was the Moroccan crisis the last instance when such currents seemed to determine the direction of Russian policy. A flicker of hope of a military rebirth could be seen by December 1905 when the Tsar had promised constitutional reform and the Moscow rebellion had been put down. Russian securities rose on the Paris market after the news of "the excellent conduct" of the Guards regiment in Moscow.'88 But this was only a flicker. Repatriating the troops from Manchuria took a long time. The militia battalions of the Moscow, St.

187 Moulin to war minister 25.X 1905. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 37. DDF VIII/2 n:o 81 188 "Sur le loyalisme de l'armee". Moulin 27.X 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 99 Petersburg, and Kiev districts were the first to be sent home, as well as the Cossacks. These were needed for reasons of internal security. No thought was given to the western border. In addition, the rebellion of the Manchurian army delayed its repatriation and military reorganization. "At the moment, a detachment commanded by General Meller-Zakomelskii, starting from Omsk, has succeeded in re-establishing order on the railway up to Krasnojarsk and is continuing towards Irkutsk. Another detachment, under General Rennenkampf is moving in the opposite direction, towards Irkutsk, occupying station after station." Thus, at least a year was to elapse before the repatriation could be completed. And even then about 300 000 men were to be left in Siberia on a war footing.189 By the end of the year 1906 the number of troops stationed in Siberia was reported to be 200 000."° The instruction and training of troops suffered considerably from policing services they had to perform. Keeping order absorbed a great number of detachments every day during the revolutionary years from 1905-1907.191 Moulin estimated that the great mass of the Russian army was untouched by the mutinies and remained loyal, prepared to defend the established order; it would triumph over the forces of anarchy. In the event, for instance, of a conflict between the government and the Duma, the technical regiments might turn out to be unreliable. The engineers, the machine gun corps, the artillery, and the automobile companies had comparatively many factory workers in their ranks and their officers were more leftist than the mass of infantry and cavalry officers.192 In fact the conflict with the Duma did not lead to civil war,

lag "Au sujet des troupes russes de Pologne et du rapatriement de 1'armee de Mandchourie". Moulin 27.I 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477 19° "Sur les effectifs maintenus en Extreme Orient". Moulin 18.XII 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477 191 "Au sujet des mauvaises conditions d'instruction des troupes". Moulin 12.XII 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477 192 "Sur 1'6-tat d'esprit de 1'armee nisse". Moulin 10.171 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477

100 but there were many painful incidents. For instance, some detachments of the Preobrazenskii Guard refused to obey order: "no tradition was able to prevail against the spirit of indiscipline" although the emperor himself was the colonel of the regiment. The generals also blamed the influence of the grand dukes who had commanded the regiment and had spoiled it.19' These grand dukes, highly ignorant both politically and militarily, poorly endowed with intellect and character, constituted one of the most nefarious elements in the Russian army: "generally a disastrous race, always parasites, sometimes harmful parasites ... Grand Admiral Aleksei Aleksandrovic has wasted the navy; under Nikolai Nikolaevic the Elder (commander-in-chief 1877-1878) theft achieved inordinate proportions and fabulous sums; Nikolai Nikolaevic the Younger (commander-in-chief designate) is surrounded by a coterie of occultists, which has a harmful effect on his nervous system".'94 And Nicholas II loved to listen to bad advice, e.g. when the grand dukes incited him to dissolve the first Duma.19' (Of course, this kind of thinking appealed to an observer from Western Europe; from the government's point of view, there was no other alternative short of surrendering the power to the rebellious Duma). The critical views expressed to Moulin about the grand dukes were those of General Dragomirov. But it seems that the younger officers judged the generals in their turn equally severely. Natural or acquired protection and seniority was the basis of a succesful career in the army. Able, independent commanders capable of taking the initiative were deemed turbulent and vain, while careerists without principles but with a calculating self-interest and a flair for flattery were promoted generals because they were deemed "intelligent and tactful

'93 "Propaganda politique dans l'armee". Moulin 28.VI 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477 '94 Moulin to war minister 20.XI 1906, discussion with General Dragomirov. EMATSH 7 N 1477 19J "Esprit de l'armee". Moulin 25.VII 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477 101 men". There were three roads for advancement: the Guards, the general staff, and the court. Thus the commanders were schooled in modish restaurants, in the offices of the St. Petersburg military district, and in the anterooms of the Palace.'96 In 1909 Roediger criticized severely the mediocrity of the generals, and the ensuing reaction was all-too typical: he was accused of insulting the army and patriotic feelings,197 and he was relieved from his appointment. When, in the same year 1909, an inquiry into corruption was ordered, "a great sorrow reigns in naval circles, where the number of uncorrupted persons is not great".198 The officer corps was reported to be discouraged as a result of the defeat in the Manchurian War, but especially also because of a disturbed feeling about whether the incorrigibles and the sovereign had really learned their lesson. They were seen to be encrusted and imbued with prejudice. The ordinary people, too, were felt to be lacking in patriotism, or their patriotism at its best was to be considered only xenophobism. There were chauvinists among the officers and civil servants, but most people served the state only for gain for the occasions it provided for peculation. The best way of advancement was submissiveness, base flattery, and complicity. The emperor, who incarnated the Russian fatherland, was seen only as a machine for signing the lists of rewards.'99 But as a reaction to these circumstances many officers started on an energetic course of self-improvement — although it was frowned on by the higher circles — and professional journals were written and read, and military questions were discussed by these groups.200 Although the fundamental ills of the Tsarist system could not be healed by a few studious officers, remarkable progress in the Russian army began to be made before the great war. Among the ordinary ranks revolutionary disconted abated: "The army corps commanders agree that the new

196 "Du haute commandement". Moulin 16.XII 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477 197 "Revue de la presse 11/24.III 1909" AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 18 196 "Revue de la presse 21.I/3.II 1909". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 18 199 "D6couragement dans le corps des officiers". Moulin 22.XI 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477 200 = 199

102 class of recruits is animated by a better spirit and is more docile than the previous one" Moulin was already reporting by the end of 1906.201 But innumerable problems of reconstruction and mutual relations were to be solved before the Dual Alliance was able to play its intended role again.

4.6. National Minority Problems in the Military Reconstruction

The western border regions caused additional military worry for Russia and the Dual Alliance from 1905 onwards. During the revolutionary disorders and constitutional hopes of the autumn of 1905 there was turbulence also in Poland, and some talk of Polish autonomy. There was also some agitation in Galicia and Posen. The French military attaché was somewhat worried lest Germany, Austria, and Russia were to subdue an eventual Polish rebellion together. This complicity might give an additional impetus towards better relations between the three empires. On the other hand, if Russia was to give autonomy to Poland, there was the danger of a violent German reaction and even a risk of France getting involved in a war against Germany in alliance with the powerless Russia. Even if a war was avoided, an autonomous Poland would cause military problems. It was problematic whether an autonomous Poland would allow the conscripting the Polish contingent into the Russian army, whether she would consent to building and using the strategic railways, and whether she would bear the military-financial burdens hitherto imposed, and whether she would consent to requisitions. Russian troops in Poland would be even more strangers there than ever before. There was also the danger of such dreams of autonomy extending to Lithuania and the Ukraine.

201 "Sur l'esprit de I'armee". Moulin 23.XII 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477 103 Palicyn reassured Moulin that there was no danger. The general staff believed firmly that Poland would not be promised anything. All Polish aspirations would be energetically rebuffed by the Duma. Russia was one and indivisible.202 Palicyn also assured Moulin that the Polish reservists, who were to be drafted to make up the Russian detachments in Poland in the event of a mobilization, were completely dependable. Their morale would be excellent if they had to fight the Germans, because they had ancient quarrels with Prussia. They understood that Poland was prospering because of the Russian customs barrier against Germany. "The government counts absolutely on the loyalty of the Poles in case of a war against Germany."203 Later on we shall see that the more recent grievances with Russia could not be totally ignored. There existed also a confused situation in the Baltic provinces. There were grave disorders there. With "a special logic the Estonian rebellious sailors had been transferred to disciplinary battalions which were sent against the insurgents in the Baltic provinces."'" From the French point of view it was extremely desirable to have these provinces pacified. They had for a long time been the object of Pan-Germanic dreams. The local Germans admired the Reich, they had the portrait of William hanging side by side with Nicholas II's picture. The discord of the local peasantry with the Germans eased the task of the Russian administration, but caused difficulties, too. Satisfying the poorer population implied upsetting the friends of Germany; on the other hand preserving the rights of the Germans meant leaving the population to the tender mercy of their landlords. This would lead to new disturbances and then to renewed

202 Moulin to war minister 28.XI 1905. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 37, DDF VIII/2 n:o 168 2203 "Sur l'incorporation des reservistes polonais". Moulin 10.XI 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477 "Au sujet des troupes russes en Pologne et du rapatriement de l'armee de Mandchourie". Moulin 27.I 1906 EMATSH 7 N 1477 20 "Sur le loyalisme de l'armee". Moulin 27.X 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 104 intrigues from the Pan-Germans. In either situation, the door was open for the intrigues of William II. Russia was left without a fleet. An insurrection in the coastal provinces would prevent the transport of troops for defending the coasts. Local autonomy would equally paralyse the communications and favour the enemy. Thus there existed the danger of a German landing and occupation of Russian territory, which was a grave threat to the capital and the communications of the army. And Russia had no means of forestalling the enemy.2°5 The opposition provoked by Bobrikov's policy had arisen in Finland simultaneously with the Russian revolution in the autumn of 1905. It had taken the form of a general strike, which paralyzed the communications of the Russian rifle battalions in the Grand Duchy. To avoid an anti-Russian rebellion and a social revolution Prince Obolenskii, the governor-general, had promised the restoration of Finnish autonomy and an extremely democratic national representation (a parliament of one chamber, universal suffrage regardless of sex). The new Finnish Senate (government) tried to restore also the separate Finnish army instead of the temporary military tax. But naturally — in the light of what has been said above of Poland and the Baltic provinces — the rebellious Finns were not given their army. Instead, they were forced to continue paying the military tax, which would increase annually to twenty million marks by 1920. Finnish protests in this as in other constitutional disputes caused St. Petersburg to Russify the Finnish Senate and the higher administration. The lower administration could not be Russified because the Russian officials were not able to speak Finnish and the Finns would not learn Russian. The military authorities and the government were afraid of an eventual Finnish armed opposition, which had been thought of but was not realized. The Russian gendarmes cooked up stories of a gigantic secret organization, smuggling of weapons, and plans for a rebellious war. A third rifle brigade was established in Finland in 1908 to prop up the

205 "Situation des provinces baltiques au point de vue militaire". Moulin 8.XII 1905. EMATSH 7 N 1477 105 Russian occupation, and plans for a military intervention were prepared.206

206 Pertti Luntinen. Suomi Pietarin suojana ja uhkana venäläisten sotasuunnitelmissa 1854-1914. Historiallinen Arkisto 79/1983 Pertti Luntinen, Venäläisten sotasuunnitelmat Suomen separatismia vas- taan. Tampereen yliopisto, Historiatieteen laitoksen julkaisuja 11. p. 46

106 5. A Slow and Devious Reconstruction

5.1. Cold Comfort for France

At the beginning of 1906 Palicyn took up the question of continuing the annual discussions of the French and Russian chiefs of staff. Palicyn explained that he did not believe in any aggressive German plans against France; she only wanted to approach her and to detach her from England. An entente with England would only make France a tool of British policy, which could arouse no sympathy in Russia. And after her experience in the Japanese war, Russia was not able to understand why France was staking her honour on a mere colonial question (Morocco was to be discussed at Algeciras). Palicyn explained that it was not in the power of any Russian government to impose any kind of war on the Russian people. They were absolutely disgusted by such things.207 Palicyn's intention is clear. He did not like France's entente with Russia's old enemy, and he was warning her that no Russian support might be expected if the Moroccan crisis resulted in war. Instead, he recommended the formation of a continental coalition. In fact, the army was one of the principal

207 Moulin to war minister 27.I. 1906. EMATSH 7 N 1477. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 38 107 obstacles on Izvolskii's road to the entente of 1907 with England and Japan. Nevertheless, Palicyn wanted to continue the discussions with his French colleague and to clear up the problem of wartime communication between them. Moulin remarked that for France the principal question was that Russia would engage as many Germans as possible. "This point had not struck Palicyn much — there is plenty to be taught to him" was Moulin's comment. Moulin admitted that it was clear that Russia would not be able to give the help she had promised to give. But he recommended engaging in discussion, because it was important not to do anything which might de jure shake the Russian engagement. And it was important also to help Russia to reconstruct her army as fast as possible, so that she should not be able to hide behind a non possumus in case her help were needed. The military attaché calculated that Russia would need at least three years to organize her mobilization, troop concentration plans, artillery, and fortifications. If all went well, something might be hoped for by the spring of 1909. In the current year, 1906, Russia was not able to wage war even against Austria alone. Such a war would be possible only if Germany were engaged elsewhere and internal disorder paralysed Austria (and the Pan-Slavists had promised such a disorder in two to four months where necessary!) In 1907- 1908 Russia might be able to oppose Austria; or if Austria should be paralysed, Russia could engage some German troops, but she would not be able to carry the offensive into German territory. By this time there were five army corps with 200 000 men still in Manchuria. Ten army corps were in position in the Vilna, Warsaw, and Kiev district, with an estimated theoretical strength of half a million men if mobilized,208 but, as Palicyn had remarked, lacking armaments, organization, materiel, and

208 By this time the Russian mobilized strength was estimated to amount to 160 000 men in the Vilna military district, i.e. II, III, and XX corps 245 000 Warsaw V, VI, XIV XV corps 140 000 Kiev XI, XII, XXI corps 200 000 returning from Manchuria, IV, IX, X, XVI, XIX Moscow, Odessa, Kazan omitted as well as the Asian military districts.

108 fortifications. Palicyn calculated that the critical period for the Russian army was going to last at least three and a half years. Her armaments had to be modernized, but in addition the officers, especially the high command, had to be rejuvenated and the morale of the army had to be raised. Palicyn declared that he welcomed the chance of a discussion with his French colleague. But, unlike his predecessor, he was not going to promise something that he was not able to keep. — Thus the promises of Saharov were annulled. Palicyn was starting work on the mobilization plan, which was going to take one year. But already it was evident that the mobilization was going to last from one to four weeks longer than estimated previously. "It was a pity that he had to confess the mistakes of his predecessors".209 After these unpromising preliminaries Palicyn saw his French colleague in April 1906. First of all they agreed that in case of a war the Germans would probably concentrate their principal effort against France, but the inverse hypothesis could not be totally excluded. In any case the French were going to attack immediately. Palicyn promised never to lose sight of the fact that the defeat of the German army was the principal strategic aim, in regard to which he would concentrate all available resources. But he could not fix the time or the zone of the Russian concentration or the consequent action, which would also partly be influenced by the action of the adversary. The Russian chief of staff was happy to be able to say that the army had suffered less than expected in the Manchurian war. At present it could be mobilized, although with a considerable delay. By the end of July all troops would be repatriated, and in a year all cadres would be reconstructed, their mobilization reorganized and their training started. The detachments would be able to fight as solid combat units, although they would not yet possess all the accessories that were necessary to make them what the Germans called operationsfähig.

209 Moulin to war minister 21.II 1906. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 38 109 The chiefs of staff also reviewed the article concerning an eventual German attempt to conquer the German provinces of Austria in case of the Hapsburg empire dissolved; but they stated there was nothing to add to it. Apparently they were not worried about Francis Joseph's health any more. But discord arose when Palicyn asked whether he could count on France executing the measures agreed on in the previous meetings in the event of a war against England. He "attached a great importance to a positive answer to this question" — which was natural because of the anti-British feeling then rife in Russia. Of course he did not receive a positive answer, since the Franco-English entente was a fact. Palicyn was answered that the measures referred to could be executed only if ratified in a convention between the two governments, and no such convention had come to the knowledge of the French general staff.'10 Russia's Asian problems were not touched on during this discussion, but in the autumn Palicyn told Moulin that many Russian officers thought that a new war with Japan was to be expected in three or four years. Japan might be supported by China, whose progress Russia observed with a great anxiety. Thus a great amount of money, men, and materials had to be concentrated in the Far East, which was possible if a policy of appeasement was pursued towards Germany. It was true that even more probable was a Japanese attack on French Indochina, which would be a more profitable conquest than the Russian possessions in the Far East. "The danger would be exceptionally great if Japan was given the giant loan she applying for".'11 Moulin explained that Palicyn was probably only warning France against granting the loan Japan was applying for. It is well known that France and England withheld their money until Japan had consented to the 1907 entente. Thus the Japanese danger disappeared.

21° "Proces-verbal de l'entretien du 3/21 avril 1906 entre les chefs d' etat-maj- ors gen6raux des armees russe et francaise AMAE. C.P. Russie N.S. 38. DDF X/2 n:o 119 --1 Moulin to war minister 10.XI 1906. AMAE. C.P. Russie N.S. 38. DDF X/2 n:o 270 110 Moulin also prepared for the next meeting of the chiefs of staff. He asked Palicyn whether it might this time be possible to insist on a point in the convention that had not been cleared up in the previous meeting, i.e. fixing the approximate moment when Russia would be able to send her contingent into action with the effectives and mode of action that were envisaged in the protocols of 1901-1902-1903. Palicyn, "usually very shifty", this time very decidedly refused to promise any offensive against Germany in the beginning of the war. Palicyn explained that the Russian army had neither the staying-power nor the tactical training indispensable for an offensive. The necessary technical and material equipment also exceeded her financial capacity. And an attack against Germany presupposed an incontestable superiority on the Austrian front, which did not exist. Strong detachments had to be kept in Caucasia in case of an eventual insurrection; Romania had to be watched by a considerable force; and in Finland there was the danger of a popular rising which Sweden was actually fomenting. An attack with limited forces from Poland to East Prussia would be useless in the absence of support by the Baltic fleet, which did not exist any more. The Russo-French convention aimed at splitting the German army in the beginning of the war. Palicyn said that this aim could be attained also by a Russian threat against the Austrian frontier. Germany would not leave her ally in the lurch; she would be compelled to leave four army corps in the east. Of course, Moulin could no be comforted. He commented that in his soul of souls Palicyn would dearly love to see even these four corps depart to the west to fight against France. Nor was Palicyn quite sure about French intentions. Wasn't her offensive power lessened in consequence of the two-year service? (After the Radicals had come to power in the aftermath of the Dreyfus affair, they nearly destroyed the morale, discipline, training, and armaments of the French army, which they suspected of anti-republican feelings. The shortened two-year service was part of this policy, which aimed at substituting a militia for the professional army).'"

Douglas Porch. The March to the Marne. The French Army 1871-1914. Cambridge University Press 1981

111 And why should the French attack at the very beginning? Couldn't they wait for the German attack behind their fortifications? Would they really attack if the Germans should turn to the east — hadn't they promised only to prepare for an immediate attack?213 This discussion, even if "frank and free" cannot have been very friendly. Palicyn did not promise anything, and Austria again became Russia's principal enemy. Next summer, 1907, the meeting of Palicyn with the French General Ladebatt went a little better. They agreed that united action was a guarantee of success. Some preparations against Germany had already been undertaken by the Russian army. A few batteries which were to act on the German frontier were already equipped with new guns, and others were being similarly armed. Ammunition and other materiel was being supplied. A plan to increase the effectiveness of railways had been submitted to the Council of Ministers. The realization of the plan would speed up the mobilization many days. But there remained a time-gap between the moment the French and German armies were mobilized and concentrated, and the day the Russian contingent would be ready to march with sufficient force to permit of really useful results. Palicyn proposed that the French general staff should take this fact into consideration in planning for the decisive engagement with the enemy. He repeated his doubt as to whether it was really necessary to attack at once. Ladebatt only answered that the difference would cause difficulties for France and that he hoped that Russia's concentration could be speeded up.214 (Douglas Porch is of the opinion that the French attitude of reckless attack was an escape forward, born out of a feeling of inferiority to the enemy. The German superiority in numbers, materiel, organization, and tactics could not be answered with anything else but the revolutionary élan of -92.)215 Palicyn also explained that it was of the utmost importance

213 Moulin to war minister 9.VII 1907. AMAE, C.P. Russie, N.S. 38. DDF XI/2 n:o 68 214 "Proces-verbal de l'entretien du 31/18 juillet 1907 entre les chefs d'etat- major generaux des armees Russe et Francaise". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 38. DDF XI12 n:o 116 215 Porch, The March to the Marne, p. 213-

112 7 to know the direction of the main German attack — to the west or the east — before deciding on the Russian troop concentra- tions. Russia had to receive the information at the latest by the end of the first week. The Italian attitude was of importance, too. If Austria were not able to trust Italy, her threat against Russia would be essentially weakened, and consequently Russia would be able to act with more spirit against Germany. Thus also the problem of wartime communication between France and Russia was of first importance.216 Next year, 1908, Palicyn explained to Moulin that he was preparing a new plan of concentration. There was to be real progress from the plan of 1901. The troops would be better divided into groups, their detrainment was to be faster, the Polish fortresses were to be better manned, their weapons more numerous, and the left bank of the Vistula was not to be stripped of troops as before.217 Palicyn stated that on the fifteenth day eleven or twelve corps would be concentrated on the frontier, and all troops would be detrained on the twenty-fifth day. But still it was "difficult" for him to say when the troops would be operationsfähig: it depended on what operations were aimed at. An attack from the Niemen towards East Prussia could be launched rather soon, but there was the fortified lake district in front of it, and therefore no speedy result could be expected from this attack. An attack from the Narew to Allenstein was as little promising as the previous one. The only direction where the Germans could be seriously disturbed was from Warsaw in the direction of Berlin. But the Russians could not emerge from their bridgeheads on the Vistula before inflicting a serious check on the Austrian army, which was concentrated to attack the communications of the Russian army on the left bank of the Vistula. Yet it was difficult to come to grips with the Austrians. Because the enemy was able to concentrate earlier, the Russians had to be concentrated far from the frontier in order to be safe. If she could maintain a sufficient superiority over the Austrians, Russia might be content to

216 "Proces-verbal ..."= 214 217 "Conversation du General Moulin avec le General Palitzyne Septembre 1908". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 39. DDF IX/2, n:o 442

8 — French information on ... 113 watch them without attacking. But this was possible only if Italy should engage a substantial part of Austria's forces. This eventuality was not certain at all. The Russian general staff hoped that on the tenth day they would have definite information of the German division of forces between the eastern and the western frontier. After that it would be possible to direct the Russian army corps to their areas of concentration. It was possible to start an attack against six to seven German corps on the fifteenth day, but its direction and the objective of the attack could be decided only after having received definite information on the German plans. Thus, even if his tone was more hopeful and forthcoming, Palicyn heaped up reasons for why he was not able to promise the early attack that the French saw as their only hope of success in the expected battle. To keep the discussion friendly Palicyn proposed that the French general staff should imagine they were in his position and make a plan for Russian action. "He would study it with great interest and present the objections which the French general staff had not been able to foresee". He had a plan for the French, too. He would let the Germans run into the French frontier fortresses, after which the French army could start its operations from its bases behind the fortress line. Such plans were only of academic interest, but they would elucidate the problems involved, instead of staying simply with a non possumus.218 Palicyn next met his French colleague in September 1908. After Moulin's previous discussion with the Russian general there was not much to be said. Nevertheless the protocol drawn up during this meeting was an attempt to pressurize and came close to being an accusation against the Russians. The grave question of the Russian attack could not be resolved, because the general staffs lacked means of communication. "The French general staff was unable to understand" that a question that had been studied for so long had not been advanced in Russia. The French also mentioned the completing of the Bologoe- Sedlec line in an equally demanding tone. (The line had been opened in 1906, but nearly half of it remained without a second

218 = 217

114 track). They now emphatically demanded that the Russian government should speed up as much as possible the work on it.219 From all this it is easy to conclude that Russia's weakness and France's position as a creditor made possible France's imperious behaviour and that Russia was sinking from the status of an ally towards semicolonial dependence.22° Of course, it is true that Russia needed France's financial and material help. But on the other hand, we have noted France's desperate need for Russia's military support. Too much must not be concluded from this protocol, either. Palicyn had asked for the French pressure against his own government. He had said to Moulin that a French demand for wireless telegraphy between the general staffs would help him to overcome the objections made by the Board of Engineers. "Their reasons are various, mainly all kinds of corruption", he confided to Moulin. He asked for a similar manifestation of pressure to help him to obtain appropriations for the Sedlec- Bologoe railway. Such pressure had to be exerted against the Ministry of Finance, which was very reluctant to part with the money.221 Palicyn's request is, after all, not very much surprising, if the idiosyncrasies of the imperial government are kept in mind. It was a symptom of the lack of cohesion in the Russian state that foreign military colleagues were trusted more than the compatriot civilian colleagues. A couple of years earlier Palicyn had asked the reluctant French for support against the English. By now Russia herself had concluded an entente with England. Izvol'skii wanted to free the military convention from its previous anti-English content. He asked the chiefs of staff to study the problems of an eventual German mobilization against England. The generals stated that a German mobilization, even a partial mobilization against a third power, was a serious danger to France and Russia. Consequently, the convention was to be applied "with

2'9 "Proces-verbal de l'entretien de 24/11 septembre 1908 entre les chefs d'état- major generaux des armees nisse et fransaise". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 39. DDF XI/2 n:o 455 220 e.g. Zaionekovskii. Plany voiny, p. 176: "Russia was interrogated on her rea- diness ..." 221 = 217

115 all vigour", i.e. the Dual Alliance would also mobilize. And mobilization implied starting a war. This could be avoided only if Germany gave sufficient guarantees of her intentions.222 In addition to the western frontier the Turkish danger, too, was kept in mind. Moulin had received the following information from Tiflis: the military there counted that they would have 250 000 Turks concentrated against them on the Caucasian frontier. As far as the Black Sea theatre was concerned, it was assumed that a military convention existed between Russia and Bulgaria. "A number of corps" (probably the seventh and eighth) were to be shipped from Odessa and Sevastopol to Varna. Moulin said that Palicyn had made an allusion to this combination. But he did not seem to have any faith in the alternative operation, the descent on the coast of the Bosphorus, "which I have always held to be rather chimaeric", although the general staff had been making plans for it for many years.223

The peacetime garrison areas of the various army corps can be seen on the attached map (map 20). The next sketch was drawn by the military attaché according to the information he had received of the planned mobilization and troop concentration (map 21). It tallies rather well with Zaionckovskii's map (map 22), except that the vanguard and reserve of the Warsaw and Vilna armies were not separated by Moulin. Of course, the Moscow army was not to remain in Moscow where Moulin has positioned it, corresponding to the situation on the eighteenth day.

5.2. Russia Retreats from the West

By 1903 the Russians had realized that if they were to transport an important part of their army to the Far East,

222 "Proc2s-verbal ..." = 219 223 "Extrait d'une rapport du Cl Moulin 2.VIII 1908". AMAE C.P. Russie N.S. 39

116 there would be insufficient troops left to attack Germany or even to meet a German attack. That was why a plan had been made to draw back Russian troop concentrations hundreds of versts. There the army could have been mobilized and concentrated in all security, while the Germans exhausted themselves in the endless approaches through Russia's western provinces — the strategy resembled that of the year 1812. (map 23) The Emperor Nicholas II had supported this plan, which harmonized very well with the wishes of the German Kaiser. His army would have been able to deal with the French army without any threat from the east. Kuropatkin had subsequently succeeded in proving to the Tsar that the plan was incompatible with Russia's obligations under the Dual Alliance. It seems that the French never learned of the existence of such a plan. But it re-emerged after the Japanese war. The defeat in the Far East had shaken rather badly the confidence of the Russian general staff in their army. German superiority worried them much more than Palicyn admitted to Moulin or the French chiefs of staff, even if his reluctance to attack was clearly seen. A reform of the army organization was prepared by the general staff and the war ministry, and it was combined with a plan of retreating from the west. But before all this occurred, new men were appointed to the command posts of the army in 1909. The independed general staff was again made part of the ministry, and the Committee of Imperial Defence was abolished. Suhomlinov, Dragomirov's former chief of staff in Kiev, was appointed to the post of war minister, in overall command of the military establishment as Miljutin, Vannovskii, and Kuropatkin had been. Nikolai Nikolaevic remained commander of the Guards and of the St. Petersburg military district, resentful because of having been eclipsed by Suhomlinov. The reform of the army organization was then completed. The organization was much simplified by the abolition of the various cadres for reserve and fortress troops. The active army corps were henceforth also to mobilize the reserve and militia formations. No troops were to remain second-line or local. That is how the number of active divisions and army corps was increased, while the over-all costs for the upkeep of the army were reduced. A territorial system of recruiting and mobilizing 117 the army was adopted, i.e. the army corps were garrisoned in the regions where their conscripts and reservists lived. (The garrison areas can be seen on the attached sketch map 24). Thus the fifth and sixteenth army corps were moved from Poland to eastern Russia; a new corps, the twenty-third, was organized in Poland; the military district of Warsaw consequently lost one corps. Two further corps, the twenty- fourth and twenty-fifth were established in Moscow and Ufa, on the western slope of the Urals. The third Caucasian army corps was garrisoned on the northern side of the mountains. On the Asian side of the Urals the fourth and fifth Siberian corps were organized. — Finland got her third rifle brigade. At one time the twenty-third corps was reported to have been in eastern Finland, but that must have been only a plan in case of a rebellion there.224 The new territorial organization made possible a faster mobilization of the army corps. Infantry and artillery could be mobilized on the fourth day (reinforced corps near the frontier) or seventh day (not reinforced corps in the frontier districts) or on the tenth day (in the interior military districts). Reserve troops could be mobilized on the thirteenth day. Cavalry was to be ready between the third to seventh days and reserve cavalry (the second and third call-up Cossacks) between eleventh to sixteenth days. Great magazines were prepared in Warsaw, Brest, and Sedlec. Requisitions were planned from Poland.225 The plan of 1903 was adopted as the basis of the troop concentration plans. It was supposed that the Germans would attack with great force before Russia was ready, and therefore troop concentrations were to be withdrawn from Poland towards the east. Thus the army could prepare itself with all necessary deliberation in the interior of the empire, protected by the empty frontier provinces against German surprises, and without any danger of being surrounded in the Polish salient. (map 25). Thereafter the army was to act "according to circumstances". — At this point of his study Zaion6kovskii could not help angrily blaming Suhomlinov and his chief

224 "Modifications å l'emplacement, Septembre 1910". EMATSH 7 N 1537 225 "Attaché militaire, Mars 1910, Renseignements sur la mobilisation". EMATSH 7 N 1535

118 planner Danilov for timidity and leaving the initiative, as well as many provinces, to the enemy.226 Simultaneously with Suhomlinov's reforms a reorientation in Russia's foreign policy also seemed to be occurring. After his success in 1907 Izvol'skii had stumbled into difficulties in the Balkans. Austria's ambitious foreign minister Aehrenthal had started a forward policy southwards, speeded up by the Young Turk revolution during the summer of 1908 which threatened to disturb the status quo. Izvol'skii, painfully aware of Russia's inability to prevent the Austrian moves, tried to reach an agreement with the rival for carving up the Orient into spheres of interest: Bosnia-Herzegovina to Austria, the Straits to Russia. Aehrenthal immediately annexed Bosnia-Herzegovina, which Austria had occupied since 1878, but did not help Russia to her share. France was not at all interested in seeing the Straits in the hands of her ally, and England wanted them opened for all, which was not what Russia desired — she wanted them for herself. At home Izvol'skii was accused of selling cheaply the brother Slays in the annexed provinces; and the Serbian chauvinists were also enraged. Izvol'skii proposed a conference to save appearances, but Austria demanded that the annexation should be accepted unconditionally, and Germany supported her ally with a message that could be regarded as an ultimatum. Roediger, the minister for war, declared that Russia had no capacity at all for waging war. Izvol'skii had to desist from further protests and Russia had to make Serbia abandon her demands for compensation. To the Russian chauvinists, this was a diplomatic Tsushima. Stolypin replaced the irritable Izvol'skii with the more docile Sazonov, and a new approach was tried in Russian foreign policy: if Germany was the menace, she must be appeased. The emperors William II and Nicholas II met at Potsdam in 1910, accompanied by their ministers Kiderlen-Wächter and Sazonov. Toasts for mutual good-will caused Kiderlen to propose Sazonov a treaty of non-aggression. Sazonov declined, because it would have annulled the Dual Alliance — which was Kiderlen's intention, of course. The policy of appeasement very nearly fell through with this refusal and the consequent news-

226 Zaion6kovskii, Plany voiny, p. 183- 119 paper polemics. But then in August 1911 Russo-German relations were patched up by an agreement on the Baghdad railway and Persia, where the Germans had intruded into the Russian sphere of interest. This colonial entente could not replace the unrealized general treaty, but for a while Russo- German relations were much better than they had been during the previous years.

5.3. The French Are Worried

Simultaneously with these grand political events, Russian plans were screened from the French view. Louis Moulin, who had arrived in St. Petersburg as a young captain in 1880, died in the autumn of 1908, after twenty-eight years' service as military attaché. He had been promoted major, lieutenant- colonel, colonel, and major-general, notwithstanding the fact that he had no experience in the command of field troops; his promotions were due to his extraordinary service in Russia. He had succeeded in creating good relations with the Russian army command, and had been instrumental in the creation and maintenance of the military alliance of Russia with France. His successors, Matton (whom we have met earlier), who was attaché from 1908-1912, and Laguiche, who served from 1912-1919, had a hard task in preserving Moulin's heritage. The quality and quantity of information was bound to fall after his death, and it could be built up only gradually. The situation was especially serious because of Suhomlinov's reforms, of which only rumours and indications reached Paris, as well as because of the supposed new course in Russian foreign policy. The French general staff were anxious. They remembered that in 1906 Palicyn had proposed the appeasement of Germany by Russia and France, and in 1907 he had adopted a purely defensive attitude in his plans for the beginning of the war. He had refused even to prepare for an offensive against Germany on the pretext of the Austrian danger. And in 1908 the work on the Polish fortifications had ceased. "Either because of incapacity, lack or organization,

120 or intentionally, Russia has not taken any effective means of defence in Poland, where the mobilization is difficult and slow." The French generals admitted the necessity of the new system of mobilization: "At present there are too many corps on the frontier. The arrival of their reservists is slow and complicated. The corps can be attacked by the enemy, who will be ready much more rapidly, before their concentration is completed. They may be disorganized, and the result of the whole campaign may be compromised. It is much preferable to detrain entire mobilized units, which are equipped with everything they need. Therefore the corps are to be withdrawn into the interior. The reform will be completed in a year. Suhomlinov promises that the frontier will be guarded by a number of reinforced corps, which do not need reservists from the interior".227 In the event of a war, it was known that Suhomlinov would concentrate his forces on the line Grodro-Belostok-Brest- Kovel-Rovno, with a vanguard of two army corps in Warsaw (map 26). The French general staff was critical of this plan, because it did not really threaten the Germans. If the Russians were ready to act on the nineteenth day, they could reach the frontier of southern Posen after a march of two weeks only, i.e. after the thirtieth day — if the enemy in East Prussia and Galicia had been succesfully paralyzed previously — which was much too late to be of any help for France, whose battle in Lorraine would have been decided by then. The French wished that Russia would strengthen her covering forces in order to immobilize the German corps on the frontier. But in fact they were moving the centre of gravity of their army to the interior of the empire.228

227 "Concentration russe. Enregistrement des principaux renseignements". s.d. EMATSH 7 N 1537 228 "Note sur le stationnement de 1'armee russe, decembre 1909". EMATSH 7 N 1537

121 Next year, 1910, the news were even worse. It was learned that Suhomlinov was abandoning and demolishing Ivangorod, Warsaw, and Zegrze, while the rear fortresses of Ossovec, Grodno, and Brest were being reinforced. And several army corps were being transferred to the interior. Only cavalry and a few rifle brigades were left at the Vistula as a vanguard. Suhomlinov had abandoned his previous idea of having Warsaw and Ivangorod as beachheads for the attack of the promised 700 000-800 000 men. The Russians were abandoning Poland to the Germans because of the threat that the Polish salient would be cut off at the Belostok-Brest line. But if the Russians retreated from Poland, the Germans would be left free to transfer all their troops to the west, leaving only two army corps to watch the frontier. "This idea, perhaps suggested by the Germanophile party, cannot be explained except by a momentaneous moral depression ... These changes are certainly going to alarm the press .. "229 The French press did raise an alarm. Le Temps wrote: "We recall that the Polish fortresses were declassified last year (1909). That might have been the foreword for replacing them with new, more modern fortifications. This view cannot be upheld any longer, in the light of the transfer of the fifth army corps. Incontestably, it is a question of a general retreat ... They have abandoned Dragomirov's doctrines. Up to this time the Russian army has had the intention of attacking as promptly as possible. The fifteen corps of Warsaw, Vilna, and Kiev, supported by the Moscow and St. Petersburg troops, were an offensive army in the first line. This disposition has been criticized for several years because of the danger of getting surrounded. A new factor was the destruction of the Russian navy, which left the coast and St. Petersburg open to a landing. There was reason enough to transfer part of the Vilna troops closer to the capital; and from there

229 "Note au sujet des projets Russes". Matton 10.II 1910. EMATSH 7 N 1538

122 it was only a step to the general withdrawal of the Warsaw troops. Thus the mirage of getting enveloped by the Germans made Suhomlinov abandon the principles of his teacher. Dragomirov had said that the Russian offensive would make all danger of the army getting cut off from Russia disappear. We must regret that France was not informed of so considerable alterations in Russia's military position. The changes ought to have been the object of detailed study by the two allied staffs".230 French ambassadors got worried, too. Barrere in Rome expressed doubt and anxiety: if the new Russian dispositions were completely defensive, how much value was left in the military alliance?231 Jules Cambon in Berlin thought that either the Russians were making concessions to the Germans, or at least they were repeating the tactics they had employed against Charles XII and Napoleon. The new dispositions indicated further that the antagonism to Austria, characteristic of Izvol'skii, was also inspiring the general staff in St. Petersburg. The retreat from the German border might be considered by Europe as a weakening of the Dual Alliance, and consequently a weakening of France's international position. Cambon stressed the need to demonstrate to the European public the unshaken intimacy of the allied general staffs.'"

5.4. The Unshaken Intimacy of the Allied General Staffs

A useful demonstration was the renewing of the regular discussions of the chiefs of general staff. The preliminaries were

230 Le Temps 20.V 1910, "Le deplacement du 5e Corps d' Armee Russe". EMATSH 7 N 1537 231 Barrere, Ambassador in Rome to MAE 30.XI 1910. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 40, 232 Jules Cambon, Ambassador in Berlin to MAE 30.V 1910. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 40, DDF XII/2 n:o 504 123 a rehearsal of the previous discussions: generals Gerngross and Ladebatt declared that the first and principal aim of the allied armies was the defeat of the German army. A German mobilization would cause an immediate and simultaneous mobilization by the Dual Alliance, while a mobilization of the Austrian or Italian forces presupposed consultation before the allied mobilization in response. The generals agreed that Germany would probably leave only three to five army corps in the east. General Ladebatt described the French troop concentrations and declared formally that the French army would start an immediate offensive against the German army. General Gerngross explained that according to the new Russian plan of concentration the Tsar's army would fight the Germans with two-fifths of its strength. By their peace-time attitude they would give the Germans the impression that a serious offensive against East Prussia was to be launched between the fifteenth and thirtieth days — which would prevent Germany from denuding her eastern frontier — and on the twentieth day they would cross the frontier with sufficient force to fight victoriously against the corps which the Germans were probably leaving in the east. The generals agreed to continue their discussions annually. And the article of the convention forbidding either party to conclude a separate peace was declared to exclude equally a separate armistice or desisting from operations.233 General Ladebatt seems to have been satisfied with this discussion. Knowing Suhomlinov's plans we must conclude that the Russian general shamelessly lied to his colleague. The French politicians were not so easily satisfied. The general staff was asked for more detailed information on the Russian plans: "What have been the results of the demarches of our ambassador and discussions of the chiefs of the general staffs? '234 General Brun of the general staff explained to the minister for foreign affairs that from the Russian point of view the new

233 Proces-verbal de l'entretien des 7/20 et 8/21 septembre 1910, entre les Chefs d'Etat-major Generaux des armees fransaise et russe". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 40. DDF XX/2 n:o 573 234 "Note du ministre". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 40, p. 53-

124 positioning of the troops was quite logical. It increased the quantity and quality of combat troops and facilitated their mobilization. The army was more evenly distributed on the territory of the empire, and it was better situated from the point of view of ensuring internal order. The defence of the secondary theatres in Finland, Caucasia, and Siberia was much better organized. It was true, Brun went on, that more than one corps had been taken away from the western frontier. But the remaining corps, with reinforced peacetime effectives, were numerous enough to engage great German forces on the eastern front, and to undertake an eventual offensive without delay. The mobilization of the corps in the interior had been speeded up. The progress made to improve the rapidity of their transport to the frontier, although not quite satisfactory, was nevertheless real. Thus the Germans would be compelled to leave an important part of their corps in the east, which was a relief for France. Therefore, the general concluded, even if the new disposition of the Russian forces had not augmented the offensive value of Russia, neither had it diminished it. This was on the condition that a spirit of offensive existed, and in this respect "the verbal declarations of the Russian chief of staff, repeated by the minister of war, have been quite categorical. There is no reason to doubt them at present".235 Identical assurances were given by the Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaeviö and Suhomlinov to the French ambassador Louis.236 The fact that General Gerngross had been reluctant to disclose any details of the new troop concentration plan ought to have been ominous enough to raise some suspicion. He had promised to give them later, but again he delayed the explanation because "an important conference" was to be held in January 1911 where "some point will be cleared up".237 The. military district commanders with their chiefs of staff were

235 Brun to MAE 14.XII 1910. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 40 236 Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE 23.XII 1910. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 40 237 War minister to MAE 17.XII 1910. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 40 125 convening in the war ministry in order to study mobilization and concentration of forces as well as the proposed operations during the first month.)$ In fact, in this conference, and in another one held in February 1912, the Russian generals hotly opposed giving up large provinces without battle. They persuaded Suhomlinov and the general staff to push the troop concentrations forward. The new, more aggressive and courageous plan was thus not due to any direct pressure by the French, who had accepted the little they knew of the plan of 1910, but to pressure by the Russian military chiefs.739 But perhaps Suhomlinov and his aides — Gerngross, and then Zilinskii and Januskevic, and the Quartermaster General Danilev — knew that the French would not like their plan, and this knowledge made them receptive to criticism. The protocol of the discussion of the generals was ratified by the allied governments. This was necessary because the reservation concerning the Austrian or Italian mobilization represented an essential change in the convention. "A mobilization to support an ally presupposes a frontier where it is possible to give such support".240 This wiev must reflect the aftermath of the Bosnian crisis and the Potsdam meeting. It may have seemed possible that Germany would not support Austria against Russia, and in that case France had no wish to get involved in a duel with Germany. In any case Russia now lost French support in the event of a war against Austria. For Obrucev this had been an essential part of the convention; Saharov had let it lapse, but Palicyn had tried hard to get it back. There is no indication of how Suhomlinov and his chiefs of staff regarded this aspect of the alliance. Count Kokovtsov was of the opinion that the minister of war was not able to think seriously about the political implications of his plans.

238 Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE 23. XII 1910. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 40 239 Zaionekovskii, Plany voiny. p. 235- 240 "Proces-verbal de la reunion du lundi 15.1I 1911 chez M. le President de la Republique". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 40

126 Soothing reports by Louis and Ladebatt did not dispel all anxiety in Paris on the Russian plans. The French consul in Warsaw sent in a report on rumours that the new disposition of troops proved that the Russians did not believe in their ability to remain in Poland if the war broke out. According to the consul the reason for this was the hostile attitude of the population: the policy of Russification conflicted with the aspirations of the Polish people. Louis in St. Petersburg did not believe the consul, he still trusted the explanations given by the Russian generals.241 But in the National Assembly in Paris strong criticism of the government was heard: the ministers declared that nothing had changed — but the Russians had drawn their troops from the frontier and dismantled their fortresses! The government had only answered that the Russians were free to do so. "The impression left to us is that the Russian alliance is, as far as the military co-operation goes, nothing more than a memory" ... The mission of the Russian army is no longer to defend their western frontier, their eventual enemy is certainly not Germany — this is the end of the military convention signed by Boisdeffre".242 These doubts seemed to be well founded, for instance when Golos Moskvy — a rightist paper — wrote, as late as October 1912: "The alliance does not oblige France to help us in affairs of the Orient, the Balkans included ... There are many facts that demonstrate to us the advantages of approaching our neighbour (Germany). The alliance with France is directed against Germany, therefore it has no advantage for us, rather it is dangerous for us".'43 Thus, after Potsdam, there were plenty of reasons to suspect the Russians of schemes to approach Germany. The French

241 Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE 23.XII 1910. AMAE. C.P. Russie N.S. 40 242 Paris-Journal 1.II 1911. "Apres Potsdam". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 40 243 "Extrait du Golos Moskvy 12/25.X 1912". AMAE C.P. Russie N.S. 41 127 civilians were much more alive to the danger than the military chiefs, who took at face value the assurances of the Russian generals. But even the French military could not remain completely satisfied with the "verbal assurances" of their Russian colleagues or with the "intimacy" of the two general staffs.

5.5. Colonel Janin Studies the Russian Army

It seems that Matton had not been able to create the confidential relations with the leading circles of the Russian army which Moulin had succeeded in maintaining for so many years. Information was much more sparse and came in late. Diplomatic representatives and journalist rumourmongers sent in more news. That was why a new man, Lieutenant-Colonel Janin, was sent to Russia. Ostensibly he was to study in the Academy of the General Staff in St. Petersburg, but in fact he was to ferret out information on the changed Russian plans. The instructions given to him reveal that the French general staff had also begun to be apprehensive in the aftermath of the Potsdam meeting. Janin was given several hypotheses to test for an explanation. He was to ascertain whether the new plan was due to 1. a wish to please the Germans and to show that Russia was her enemy only in theory 2. a fear of an Austro-German offensive with superior forces before the Russian reinforcements had arrived from the interior 3. difficulties in realizing the mobilization and concentration of troops in Poland, where everything had to be transported from the interior along with inferior and lengthy routes 4. a desire to organize the recruiting and mobilization on a regional basis. 128 8 He had also to study how the acceleration of mobilization and, on the other hand, the increased distance to be travelled by the transports from the interior to the frontier affected the time the Russians would be able to start their operations; how great was the strength of the covering forces on the frontier; what was the division of the Russian forces between the Austrian and German frontiers; and whether changes had occurred in the Russian attitude towards France.24 After a winter of study (1910-1911) Janin reported that Russia had, indeed, turned towards the interior, and had given up external adventures. A will to develop the country materially and morally had emerged; the wealth of central and eastern Russia seemed more important than the western confines of the empire. Troops were transferred from the western frontier towards the interior because of the revolution and jacqueries of 1905 and 1906. They might be needed also in case the workers' strikes grew into open conflict. National pride had suffered under the defeat of the Japanese war, Janin went on. This had caused an explosion of nationalist feeling among some people. A strong party wanted to unify Russia and assimilate other nationalities by fair means or foul. Therefore a series of measures had been taken regarding the Finns; and then there were the Poles, a particularly tempestuous and resistant race. One additional reason for the transfer of the garrisons from the west was the reluctance to let Russia's military expenditures be spent to the profit of Poland. Many people in Russia liked Germany more than France. They were also afraid that the French aversion to Tsarism might diminish France's determination to support Russia; neither did they have a high opinion of the value of the French army. That was why the idea of keeping strong forces near the western frontier was thought to be obsolete. The old plans for troop concentrations had been difficult to realize, and this might have been disastrous in the beginning of a war, especially if Germany had concentrated her principal forces against Russia and not against France. The Russians had adopted the most unfavourable hypothesis of having to fight

24 Programme du LtCol Janin, septembre 1910. EMATSH 7 N 1485

9 French information on ... 129 alone against Germany in the beginning of the war. They did not doubt eventual French support, but they wished to be prepared for the eventuality that it would not turn out to be as effective as the French had promised. Thus Russia was adopting the strategy of Peter I or 1812. Russia also had more enemies than before. Even though of enormous size, she was encircled. And her enormous size annulled the advantage of interior lines of communication. Japan had obtained a beachhead on the Asian continent, which made her eventual offensive easier and speedier. Her victory had nourished her avidity, and there were already secret Japanese agents among the Siberian natives. China was making military progress, and felt a profound hostility towards Russia. Her population was increasing. All this made the future sombre for Russia. Russian Turkestan was surrounded by Persia and Turkey, i.e. countries where the Russians were heartily hated. Pan-Islamic ideas were seeping in among the population as far as on the Urals and on the banks of the Volga — Turkish emissaries had been seen there. Turkey was especially dangerous, because she was Germany's tool; the Germans were at home in Turkey. Turkey's military might was growing, and the mobilization of the Turkish Erzerum corps would be accelerated when the Anatolian railway was completed. In the Caucasian provinces the vanquished Mussulmans had remained hostile to Russia, nor were the other peoples and religions more favourably disposed towards the empire. Defence on the Caucasian frontier was difficult. Hence an offensive was necessary, but in peacetime sufficient troops could not be maintained there, and the railway was a zig-zag which allowed only 14 trains a day. That was why Russia was improving her railways in Caucasia, as well as in the Far East, more than in the west. In the west Romania was hostile, a member of the Triple Alliance. Austria was profoundly hated by the Russians for reasons of history and of religion, and because of the Bosnian annexation, and indeed from all kind of suspicion. Austria favoured her own Poles, and might try to conquer Poland with the aid of the Russian Poles. Perhaps she aimed also at the Ukraine. The persons in governing positions in Austria were supposed to be hostile to Russia.

130 German might was frightening, though in fact there were grounds for only relatively unimportant disputes with her. Sweden was a small country and therefore important only as an auxiliary to the other enemies. But she was dangerous because of her influence on Finland. The years 1905 and 1906 had only worsened the situation in the Grand Duchy. Thus Russia had enemies on all frontiers. She could not afford to wage war, and she did not want war, especially not against Germany, with whom she had no contradictory interests. She had the carcass of Poland as a shield against an attack from the west, and she hoped that Germany would force Austria to be peacefully disposed towards Russia.245 Janin's report reflects well the suspicious, jealous outlook on the world which reigned in military and patriotic circles in Russia at that time. On Russian mobilization Janin reported that the territorial system adopted in 1910 did accelerate mobilization. The reservists did not need to travel so far. But it remained slow compared with the speed of German or French mobilization, and there was nothing that could be done to speed up it. The most important and effective means of accelerating Russian troop concentrations was to improve the railway network. As it was, there were several army corps to be transported along one railway line. Other problems remained, too, especially the great percentage of Jews and Poles in Poland, "towards whom the Russians feel an extreme aversion".246 The defence of St. Petersburg remained a problem. Sweden, although a minor enemy, was dangerous as a vanguard for an attack by the Triple Alliance against the Russian capital. She was preparing for an invasion of Finland, where the situation resembled that of Caucasia. The Finns counted on Russia's internal or external difficulties to regain their complete autonomy — the press of the Grand Duchy did not conceal this aim — and "I have been told several times that this is an absolute fact". With a view to the contraband traffic, it was not at all unreasonable to suppose that the insurgents had light artillery there. That was why Finland could not be left unoccupied in the event of war.

245 Janin to General Vignal 9-13.V 1911. EMATSH 7 N 1485 246 Janin to Vignal 3.III 1911. EMATSH 7 N 1485 131 Janin's informants stressed that St. Petersburg needed her garrison even in wartime. It was the site of the government, the residence of the emperor and his family. Prudence dictated leaving a strong garrison there. That was to be the Guards corps, with its strong ties to the sovereign and his family. Perhaps even more was necessary, in the light of the proximity of Finland and the difficulty of securing order in the immense city and its environment. There was also the danger of a German landing, because the capital was situated on the coast, and because Russia had no fleet and one could not be rebuilt very soon. It was true that there were rumours of fortifications to be constructed on the coasts of the Gulf of Finland. "An attempt at a landing on the Russian coast by the Germans may seem very improbable to us, but it does not follow that the Russians see the situation in the same light". The threat of enemy landing was a constant and frequent subject of study in the Academy of the General Staff. Even a small attempt on the coastal towns would produce a serious moral effect, and rumours sewn by the enemy augmented the Russian tendency to precautionary measures on the coast. Janin doubted whether the troops in the St. Petersburg military district (the Guards, the first army corps in Novgorod, the eighteenth in Estonia and Pskov, and twenty-second in Finland) could be included in the strength of the Russian army in respect of the western theatre of operations. In any case the Guards and the twenty-second corps could only be mobilized very slowly, because they had no reservists in the neighbourhood.247 By the year 1911 the Dual Alliance did not appear to be worth much, then. Nor did France receive much help from her ally and friend during the renewed Moroccan crisis. During the time of the Bosnian crisis Izvol'skii had received cold comfort from Paris. It must have been sweet for him to react identically to the French government, when, in its turn, it asked for support in Morocco in 1911. Russian public opinion would not

247 Janin to Vignal 28-31.III 1911. EMATSH 7 N 1485

132 be able to understand that a mere colonial question might be a casus belli, Izvol'skii said.24ß — It was with British support that Kiderlen's schemes in Morocco were repelled and rendered relatively harmless in the Congo. It is true the the French Ambassador in St. Petersburg reported that the Russian Foreign Office had promised to support France, not only diplomatically but also militarily, if necessary.249 Generals Dubail and Ladebatt visited St. Petersburg and got a promise of support from the Russian general staff, too. But they got also a declaration that the Russian army would not regain complete operational ability until 1913.250 It is not quite clear whether any decision had been made in St. Petersburg in the event that the Moroccan crisis had led to war. It is well known that Stolypin demanded peace for his reforms. During the critical month of August the treaty on Persia and Baghdad railway was signed between Russia and Germany. Thus there was no certainty of Russian help for France, even if the Russians declared that the agreement with Germany did not constitute a treaty on general policy between the two empires.25' A little later Zilinskii was reported to have said that a war because of Morocco would not have been popular in Russia, and that public opinion was not without influence in Russia; it had forced the government to war in 1877.252 Janin calculated also the strength of the Russian army, its effect on Germany and its value for France.253 In peacetime there were 260 000 men in the Vilna and Warsaw districts (Niemen-Vistula frontier 140 000, Riga-Minsk area 70 000, Lublin-Brest area facing Austria 50 000). On the twenty-third day there would be 700 000 men concentrated on the 350 kilometres of the Niemen-Vistula frontier. The offensive might begin then, and contact with the Germans might be expected on the twenty-eighth day. If the Russians won preliminary successes against Austria, they would be able to

848 MAE to Ambassador in St. Petersburg 21. VIII 1911. DDF XIV/2 n:o 200 249 MAE to Ambassadors in St. Petersburg, Berlin, London 14.VIII 1911. DDF XIV/2 n:o 172 250 "Proces-verbal de l'entretien du 18/31 aout 1911, entre les Chefs d'Etat- major generaux des armees francaise et russe". DDF XIV/2, n:o 232 251 = 249 252 "Voyage du G1 Gilinsky 1912". Matton 17.I 1912. EMATSH 7 N 1487 133 launch a really dangerous attack against Germany on the fortieth to fiftieth day. This day could be advanced if Austria met grave complication with Italy or in the Balkans. Thus the Russian action would not have any serious effect on the Germans before the thirtieth day. Germany needed to keep only three to five corps and ten to fifteen reserve divisions in the east.254 Janin's calculation was based on the hypothesis that the Russians were to attack at the earliest moment. His information on the Russian troop concentrations (map 27) shows the Russian army corps much more to the west than in the previous, alarming plan (which the French had not seen, but heard rumours of, as pointed out earlier). It is evident that by the end 1911 Janin has received preliminary information on the plan of 1912. There were eight infantry divisions and seven cavalry divisions covering the German border. Seven infantry divisions and five cavalry divisions served as covering troops for the Austrian border. These units could be mobilized and concentrated on the eighth day. The region of St. Petersburg was defended by the Baltic army, which consisted of the Guards and the twenty-second corps with 3 reserve divisions. There were four armies in the north-western group against East Prussia, as well as four armies in the south-western group

esa The strength of the Russian army in 1911 active in Europe Guards corps troops Grenadier corps I—XXV army corps Caucasia I—III corps Turkestan I—II corps Siberia I—V corps in all 37,5 corps available in Europe 28,5 corps (III Cauc. included) reserve infantry 35 divisions troops cavalry 9 divisions militia I call-up 20 divisions troops II call-up 20 divisions "Note sur l'armee russe, juin 1911". EMATSH 7 N 1538 254 "Au sujet de la valeur de la cooperation russe, ltcol Janin dec 1911, et Avis du 2e bureau de Petat-major de l'armee". EMATSH 7 N 1538 134 against Galicia. If the Germans should attack with more than 25 divisions, the four armies (17 corps and 17 reserve divisions) would defend the line Kovno-Belostok. If there should be less than 25 German divisions attacking, the north-west group was to fight with 15 corps on a line a little more forwards, one or two marches from the Prussian border. Novo-Georgievsk was to be defended by the left army consisting of 2 corps and 2-3 reserve divisions. The south-western group was to have 10 or 12 corps, depending on the situation on the German border. The active corps would be concentrated on the twenty-third day, except for the twenty-fifth corps from eastern Russia which would be concentrated on the thirtieth day. Reserve troops would be ready for action on the fortieth day. The south- western group was to attack as soon as possible in order to free the left flank of the north-western group. The latter was to attack East Prussia as soon as it had the necessary superiority, without waiting till the twenty-third day.25, Thus the Russian plan now seemed to be turning out more satisfactorily from the French point of view. But before it was completed the Balkan crisis of 1912-1913 brought a new urgency to military planning work and to the general diplomatic framework of the Dual Alliance.

5.6. The Balkan Wars 1912-1913

Italy wanted to assert herself as a great power, but it was difficult to find an adversary weak enough. Even Abyssinia had been too strong. But by 1911 it was seen that the Young Turk revolution had not been able to rejuvenate Turkey, which continued to live in a state of disorder. While other powers were occupied by the Morocco crisis, the Italians attacked Libya. The Turks were not able to resist very well, but the desert nomads proved a nuisance and prevented a swift pacification. To conquer them Italy sent a fleet to the Aegean

255 "Note sur la concentration russe" Matton 22.III 1911. EMATSH 7 N 1538

135 Sea, where the Dodecanese Islands were occupied and traffic in the Straits disturbed. Russian grain worth millions of roubles rotted in South Russian ports. The imperial government could not afford to ignore the new complication. But Russia was not eager to resort to forward politics in the Near East yet; her own internal reforms had only started a few years earlier. A plan was made to defend the status quo in alliance with Turkey and the small Balkan states. A note was sent to the Porte. But the Turks had no confidence in the good intentions of Russia. The note made them suspicious instead. To pacify them Sazonov had to disown the note and blame everything on Carykov, the ambassador in Constantinople.

In the beginning of 1912 Matton discussed the situation with 2ilinskii, the new chief of staff. The general thought that something was going to happen in the Balkans in the spring. Perhaps Austria was to advance southwards to the Sandjak of Novipazar. That would be opposed by Serbia and Montenegro, while Bulgaria might try to conquer Macedonia. Russia would have to intervene. Probably a casus foederis would emerge for the Triple Alliance, and consequently also for the Dual Alliance and the Triple Entente. The result would be the European conflagration which had so often been predicted and so often adjourned; now it was to be faced. Matton concluded that Russia was beginning to regain her confidence — more so than she had wanted to admit during the Moroccan crisis. She would probably not submit to another affront like that of 1908-1909. If Germany was going to support Austria, the Russians hoped that France would support Russia. "It seems to me rather advantageous for France if the war against Germany should break out under these conditions". A Russo-Serbo-Montenegrin war against Austria would be popular in Russia, and, said Matton, would remain popular if it were transformed into a war against the Triple Alliance. Being the first to take to arms, Russia's moblization would be in advance of that of Germany and that of France. And if

136 Germany should mobilize in order to support Austria, there was some hope that she would send more forces to the eastern frontier, to the advantage of the French. It seemed desirable that a conflagration, if it must come, should come under these conditions, and before the Russian army was again drawn towards other directions of conquest, e.g. China, Japan, or Turkey, "where we are not immediately interested, and where consequently all the sacrifices we have made for Russia's military recovery would be lost for us".256 Here we have our Machiavellian friend of 1892 at his schemes again, eagerly looking forward to the great conflagration, as did also the Russian chief of staff. — As will be seen, Matton's report had no influence on the course of the Balkan crisis of 1912-1913. But it may have had some importance for the consequent strengthening of the Dual Alliance by French efforts in the years 1912-1914. The St. Petersburg government had thought of the alliance of the Balkan states as a check on Austrian appetites. But the small Balkan states made their alliance against Turkey, and they were spurred on by Panslavist Russian envoys in the Balkan "capitals", in direct contradiction to the intentions and directives of Sazonov. Turkey's defeat in the war against Italy made the Balkan states confident of their success. The confidence was not misplaced. The Turks were very nearly chased out of Europe. The danger of a Bulgarian conquest of Constantinople caused feverish preparations for a Russian or an international intervention. Happily for Russia, at the last moment the Turks succeeded in stopping the Bulgarian advance. But the partition of Macedonia proved diffcult. Austria and Italy had no wish to see Serbia on the Adriatic and insisted on an independent Albania on the coast. Russia opposed these demands and supported Serbia and Montenegro. A war was just avoided, because Russia was too weak, and because France and Germany restrained their allies. Sir Edward Grey invited the ambassadors of the great powers to a conference which succeeded in adjusting the conflicting politics of the great powers. Albania was made independent.

256 Matton to war ministeri 17.I 1912. EMATSH 7 N 1487 137 With Albania out of the game, there was much less booty left for the Balkan allies. The quarrel led to a Bulgarian attack on Serbia, who was then supported by Greece; then Bulgaria was stabbed in the back by Romania, and even Turkey reconquered Adrianople (Edirne) on the Bulgarian frontier. The result was a disaster for Russia. She had not been able to support her Slav proteges, the contending parties had not appealed to the Tsar's arbitration as they were supposed to do, and now a defeated Bulgaria was embittered and no longer a Russian satellite. Of Russian goodwill only a precarious remnant was left in Serbia. On the other hand, Romania started casting covetous eyes on Transylvania and for a while forgot her irredenta in Bessarabia. A great war had been very close. As can be seen from Matton's report, 2ilinskii was not especially decidedly against a war. Suhomlinov had proposed a mobilization against Austria, without thought of the German reaction. The Tsar's civilian ministers had nevertheless succeeded in averting the catastrophe. Especially had Kokovtsov, Stolypin's successor since 1911, been decidedly against war. But Sazonov was heard to say: "An Austrian attack into Serbia would arouse Russian opinion, which would be difficult for the government to restrain" and Izvol'skii explained: "although the Russian government has the firm intention of not being dragged to war, it would be difficult to oppose public opinion".257 Neo-Slavist feeling had been awakened by the Balkan events. This augmented the national feeling which had grown in strength since 1905. It was difficult to ignore this opinion. Even if the Russian government was not a parliamentary one, it needed some support in order to be able to function in face of the opposition from the right and from the left. After the debacles of 1908-1909 and 1912-1913 it was difficult to accept a third diplomatic Tsushima without irreparable damage to internal stability and external prestige.

257 Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE 17.XII 1912. EMATSH 7 N 1480 Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE 12.XII 1912. EMATSH 7 N 1480

138 6. Naval Plans

Russia was a continental power, and the Dual Alliance was mainly a military affair. But the naval aspect is not completely void of interest either, because it completes the military picture and sheds additional light on Russian imperialism. It is a pity that the documentation is not complete, the reports of the naval attachés being available only for the years 1904-1913.258 Again, the naval attachés were replaced frequently, almost annually. Thus they were not able to establish such confidential relations with their Russian colleagues as Moulin did. Consequently they had no naval secrets to report, comparable to the mobilization, concentration and operational plans of the army. Of course, there may not have existed any detailed plans, due to the different nature of naval operations compared with warfare on land. The Gulf of Finland seems to have been an exception in this respect. The naval policy and building programmes were publicly discussed and consequently have been able to be dealt with by numerous historians.259

258 Service Historique de la Marine, SHM, series BB7, volumes 67, 75, 120-122 259 Petrov, Podgotovka ..., K.F. Sacillo, Russkii imperializm i razvitie flota 1906-1914 gg. Moskva 1968 René Gregerer, Die Russische Flotte im ersten Weltkrieg 1914-1917. Mün- chen 1970 Charles E. Adams, Der Wiederaufstieg der russischen Kriegsmarine in den Jahren 1905-1914. Marine Rundschau 1/1964. 139 6.1. A Naval Convention Discussed

The military convention was concerned only with warfare on the continent. To complete it, a naval convention was discussed in 1901, evidently in connection with the strengthening of the alliance at Delcasse's instigation. The chiefs of the French and Russian naval staffs discussed their strategy in the event of a war against England and/or the Triple Alliance. The discussions had no practical consequences, but they illuminate very well the Russian dispositions on the eve of the Japanese war. The French admiral explained that the principal French naval forces were to be concentrated in the Mediterranean, leaving only second-class and coastal battleships for the North Sea. A landing in England was to be prepared, and made to look threatening, in order to tie up as many English troops as possible. The French Far East naval forces were to operate in the Indian Ocean. The Russian admiral stated that Russian coastal vessels and small warships were to be concentrated in the Baltic Sea, to take up a strictly defensive position. Eight armoured ships were to operate in the Black Sea, and three cruisers in the Mediterranean. The navy had the task of shipping one army corps over the Black Sea to the Bosphorus. Sixteen battleships and thirty-two cruisers would form the Russian Pacific squadron. Thus, once the Russian building programme was completed, the Russian and French fleets would complement each other rather well. The presence of the Russian fleet in the Far East would enable the French to withdraw their ships from the China Sea. The Russian sphere of action would be extended to the Malacca peninsula, and the Russians might have the use of some bases in French Indochina. The French cruisers in the Indian Ocean would prevent the English from sending reinforcement to their Asian colonies. A diversion by the Russian Black Sea fleet from the Dardanelles to the eastern Mediterranean would facilitate the task of the main French fleet in the Mediterranean and weaken the English squardon at Malta. France would guarantee Russian interests and security in the Mediterranean and prevent the English from sending 140 their army through Turkey. Because of the menace of a landing in England, the English in India would be left alone to face the Russian offensive from Central Asia over the land frontier.26o A couple of years later the French sketched anew Russian support for France: the eight Black Sea battleships were to convoy the transport of the Sevastopol and Odessa army corps over the sea to the Bosphorus at the beginning of hostilities. After forcing the passages, the warships would convoy the transports to the Gallipoli peninsula, where the troops would disembark, while the warships were destroying or occupying the fortifications on the banks of the Dardanelles. After that the battleships could advance to Bizerta, there to join the French executing French naval plans in the Mediterranean.26' This plan, with no difficulties anticipated, seems to have been wishful thinking on the part of the French admirals, a project without Russian signatures. Why should the Russians have forced the Straits only in order to support French plans? These naval plans were not as detailed and concrete as the army plans, of course, because ships are able to move and act with much less previous preparation than armies. Their interest lies in the implied dreams of imperialist grandeur. These schemes of naval imperialism were not without support among influential Russian journalists. Novoe Vremja sketched a Russian sea power with French support: "The Russo-French alliance is not necessary for obtaining French support against the German army, which Russia has no reason to be afraid of. (As indicated earlier, at this time Novoe Vremja supported the idea of a continental coalition). But Russia has a redoutable enemy at sea. If Russia wants to benefit from sea commerce, if she does not wish to let her peasants toil only in order to enrich English navigation companies, she has to ensure the freedom of the seas, the equality of all nations on the ocean passages which have not yet been divided into spheres of influence. That is why Alexander III

260 "Note sur un accord naval entre la France et la Russie 21.XII 1901." AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 35. DDF III/2, annexe III 261 "Accord naval entre la France et la Russie. Hypothese d'une guerre avec l'Angleterre. 5.I 1903". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 36 141 began to create the navy without which the commercial fleet, the guarantee of the welfare of nations, cannot exist. The Russo-French alliance guarantees to Russia the help of the French fleet, the only fleet which the English cannot blockade in its bases and which is able to attack the English on the oceans. The combined Russo-French navies might well be able to dispute the English title of the queen of the seas".262 Later, during the Far East war, the French consul in Harkov reported that a committee had been formed there, under the protection of a grand duke and an admiral, with the aim of acquiring a chain of naval bases reaching from Kronstadt to Vladivostok, with the help of the French. On the Mediterranean Algiers or Crete were thought of, on the Red Sea Djibuti or some Arabian port was hoped for, then followed Madagascar and/or Sumatra on the Indian Ocean, and finally some Chinese or Indochinese port on the coast of the China Sea. The coal for these stations would be exported from the Donets, which explained the interest of businesmen there. The consul characterized the project as chimeric.263 Of course, this plan had no practical consequences. But it is important as an example of the unofficial dreams that formed the background, the sounding board and moving force, of the official diplomacy and military or naval schemes described here and elsewhere in this study. Imperialism cannot be understood if only official documents are studied. The chancelleries dealt with only that which was deemed practical and immediately possible, while the patriots, chauvinists, builders of empire, desired much more. The naval discussions reflected the fact that at this time the Russian and French staffs saw their alliance as a guarantee against England, too. But by 1903 Delcasse was preparing the ground for the Entente Cordiale, and it is understandable that no naval convention was signed nor any definite plans made; especially in view of the threatening conflict in the Far East. Not all French sailors were enthusiastic about their allies:

262 Novoe Vremja 4/17.XII 1902. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 36 263 French consul in Harkov to MAE 12.IX 1904. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 17

142 "Their ships are well kept, and the internal service seems correct and even rigid in details. But their manoeuvring left much to be desired. The ships did not keep position, anchoring took a long time and nevertheless was no great success ... However, I am far from fearing that in a common war we should experience nuisances analoguous to those we felt a century ago from our Spanish allies 264 Somewhat later the imperial navy proved its worth at Tsushima.

6.2. The Calamitous Odyssey

From the very beginning, there was only bad news from the Far East war: "The conduct of the Russian squadron in the naval battle of 10/23. VIII 1904, its subsequent inaction, and its ultimate destruction without battle in the basin of Port Arthur was bound to call forth various comments in the Far East, generally not very flattering to our ally".'265 Then the ships collected from the Baltic ports were named the second and the third Pacific squadron and sent to the Far East under the command Admirals Rozestvenskii and Nebogatov. The copious correspondence of the French agents along the route was concerned with the supply problems of the Russians, who called in frequently at French ports. The further the armada advanced, the more nervously the French tried to keep up a semblance of neutrality.266 They had no wish to provoke the Japanese, which might bring with it the calamity of an

264 Contre-Amiral Boutet, commander of the Mediterranean light squadron to the commander-in-chief of the Mediterranean fleet 14.IV 1902. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 36 265 Vice-admiral Bayle to navy minister II.IV 1905. SHM BB 7 n:o 67 a 266 SHM BB 7 n:o 67 a "Guerre russo-japonaise" contains the correspondence 143 eventual British involvement. On the other hand, the Russians should not be cold-shouldered into German arms.267 Afterwards it was easy to see the inevitability of the Russian defeat and to point to forebodings recorded before the battle: "All these complaints of the minor difficulties, impatience at the slightest obstacle, the discouragement on any occasion, seem to indicate that in the measure the squadron approaches the East the commanders realize the difficulty of their mission and search for a plausible pretext which would allow them to declare that it is impossible to proceed further".268 But in fact there are also plenty of optimistic reports among the contemporary documents: "The Russian admiral made an excellent impression, he seemed energetic and frank, and apparently he possesses the entire confidence of his men ..."269 "What is known of his character makes certain that he will seek battle, and that is all that is known of his plans".270 These reports reflect also the lack of concrete naval plans, referred to above: "The Russian admiral is allowed complete freedom of action, no one in St. Petersburg knowing Rozestvenskii's plans".271 It is true that the Russian admirals had a special reason for the absence of plans. The imperial navy had no naval general staff at that time, and the French staff had planned their voyage for them — the route, the ports to be called at, the logistics, the manoeuvres. The complete destruction of the fleet was a calamity, an unpredictable and unpleasant occurrence to the French as well as to the Russians themselves.

267 cf. Manninen, The Second Russian .. 268 Naval attaché to navy minister 17.XII 1904. SHM BB 67 e 1 269 Admiral Jonquieres to navy minister 8.V 1905. SHM BB 7 n:o 67 a 270 Naval attaché to navy minister 8/21 IV 1905. SHM BB 7 n:o 67 e 2 271 = 270

144 9 "The battle of Tsushima makes clear in a sinister and new light the lack of naval and military spirit of our allies ... they had the arms, they had the time to learn to use them ... thus their ineptitude must have been great and profound ... a general stupefaction reigns in the admiralty: 'a misfortune ... who could have guessed', which does not augur well as to the future ..."272 Admiral Togo himself was unable to account for his complete and miraculous victory over "an equal and determined adversary" except by referring to the superhuman virtues of his emperor and the invisible protection of the imperial ancestors.273 Of course, the French had no reason to exaggerate the valour of the Russian sailors and to rest content with a supernatural explanations. That there was something thoroughly wrong with the ally's navy was soon confirmed by a report from the Black Sea: "Mutiny of Knjaz Potemkin".274

6.3. Reorganization

The participants in the hattle of Tsushima were interrogated and culprits were found. But the French were hardly impressed: "the more I learn, the more evident it seems to me that the participants are less guilty than those who remained barricaded in the offices of the Admiralty; organization and preparation was more faulty than execution".275 The Russian navy had been inferior because badly commanded and consequently badly trained, being "an independent and

272 Naval attaché to navy minister 3.W 1905 SHM BB 67 e 2 273 "Combat naval de la mer du Japon". Japan Times 14.VI 1905 (translation). SHM BB 7 n:o 67 a 274 Ambassador in Constantinople to navy minister 5.VII 1905 SHM BB 7 n:o 67 d 275 Naval attaché to navy minister 19.V 1906. SHM BB 7 n:o 75-13

10 — French information on ... 145 fanciful Grand Duchy".246 The commander-in-chief had been the Grand Duke Aleksei Aleksandrovi6, Grand Admiral of Russia, a dilettante who bore a great part of the responsibility for the deplorable state of the navy, even in financial respects.277 But now a responsible minister of the navy was appointed, with a deputy minister responsible for the administration and a chief of the naval general staff charged with planning, preparing and organizing for war.278 Later this triumvirate — which could be compared with the divided leadership of the army during the years 1905-1909, a leadership bound together only by the President of the Council of Imperial Defence — was reorganized so that all officials were put under the minister. He alone became answerable for the naval forces of Russia.279 The reformers had quite a task confronting them. They had to overcome "the inertia, bad faith, jealousy, ignorance, incomprehension, carelessness (of the former administration) ... What remains of the Russian navy is so gangrened that if would be better if no trace of the ships or the personnel existed ...'"8° There were people who regarded the situation as being beyond help: "the navy is in a deplorable condition, even lower than the Ottoman navy; the moneys which ought to be spent on the reorganization of the navy do not arrive at their destination; the general staff is completely incapable, and with the Admiralty Council and Imperial Naval Cabinet (i.e. the old admirals and the emperor) meddling in the reform, the result is anarchy, impotence, squandering of money ... There is only one thing that could save our country, and that is revolution ..."281

276 "Organisation generale 1907". SHM BB 7 n:o 75-13 277 "Rapport de fin de mission 1.II 1911". SHM BB 7 n:o 121 b 278 Naval attaché to navy minister 30.XI 1908. "Reforme du ministare de la marine". SHM BB 7 n:o 75 b 279 "Rapport annuel 9.XII 1912". SHM BB 7 n:o 121 e 289 Naval attaché to navy minister 1.VII 1905. SHM BB 7 n:o 67 e 2 281 "Opinion de l'attache naval russe å Constantinople". Ambassador in Con- stantinople to MAE 5.IV 1910. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 r

146 The minister tried to eradicate corruption, but the French naval attaché was sceptical: "I'm afraid that this measure will not result in anything, because the malady is endemic in the public and private administration; the race ought to be reformed ..."282 Gradually these sombre views were replaced by more optimistic reports; the improvement was undeniable, if slow. The Duma took a lively interest in the reform, demanding tangible improvement as a precondition of approving the naval estimates. Sometimes a constitutional crisis threatened, because the Duma was seen to be usurping the imperial prerogative of naval command.283 It was not until Admiral Grigorovic was appointed navy minister in 1911 that complete confidence was established between the naval administration and the Duma. After that there were no more parliamentary difficulties for the naval revival. Instead of the previous theatre commanders (e.g. Commander in Chief of the Fleet and Ports of the Black Sea), port commanders directly under the ministry were now appointed to take care of the administrative task in the principal naval bases. This made the new commanders-in-chief of the naval forces in the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea, and the Pacific able to concentrate on the operational preparation and training of their fleets.'" The improvement was slow, because innumerable officers of the old school survived in the lists, afraid of the pushy young men who had learned from the war.285 The inadequacy of the old commanders emerged clearly during the manoeuvres of 1908, when several young admirals demonstrated their ability.286 They were appointed to responsible posts and

282 Naval attaché to navy minister 1.X 1909. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 b 283 "Budget naval et Douma", naval attaché to navy minister 23.I 1907. SHM BB 7 n:o 75 b "Considerations divers: Ukase du 2 Septembre 1909 sur les lois fonda- mentaux". Naval attaché to navy minister 2.X 1909. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 e 284 Naval attaché to navy minister 24.I 1907. SHM BB 7 n:o 75 285 "Personnel 1908". Naval attaché to navy minister 22.I 1907. SHM BB 7 n:o 75 b 286 "Manoeuvres navales en Baltique", naval attaché to navy minister 28.VIII 1908. SHM BB 7 n:o 75 b 147 "the Baltic fleet, under the command of an energetic admiral, seems to be training capable personnel for the future navy ... officers are animated by a new spirit, persuaded that a serious effort must be made" 281 There is a delightful whiff of racism in the French comments: "It is certain that the Admirals Essen and Boström, (Baltic and Black Sea commanders), neither of whom is of Russian origin, i.e. Slav, have succeeded in giving a shove to the natural torpor of this "288 race . . Little by little serious progress was realized, discipline re- established289 and a determined effort made "to raise the navy to occupy a honorable place in the line of the navies of other European powers ... conquering the inertia and habits dating from several centuries, in the gigantic effort of reconstructing a modern navy".29° The crews of the Russian ships were conscripts, who served for four years. The port equipages trained the conscripts, formed the crews for new ships, and prepared for mobilization.29' The numerical strength of the navy did not significantly grow during these years, because of the lack of ships for them to man.292 The illiteracy of the conscripts was a problem,

267 "Rapport annuel 9.XII 1912". SHM BB 7 n:o 121 c 266 "Rapport annuel 8.I 1910". SHM BB 7 n:o 120 r 269 "Au sujet de la mission en Russie de M. le Lieutenant de Vaisseau Galland, attaché a la P'" section, 13.IX 1909". SHM BB 7 n:o 120 f 299 "Recapitulation 1909". SHM BB 7 n:o 120 f 291 Port equipages St. Petersburg 2 equipages (= battalions, approximately) Kronstadt 1/2 Vladivostok 1 Libau 1 Sevastopol 1 Nikolaev 1 Reval 1 company Sveaborg 1 —"— Caspian ports 1 —"— "Equipages de la Marine". Naval attaché to navy minister 24.I 1907. SHM BB 7 n:o 75 292 Naval effectives 1895 35,550 men

148 especially because the navy was becoming more mechanized all the time and needed more non-commissioned officers and engineers.293 This was a problem because of the revolutionary spirit of the workers, which had caused difficulties in the navy during the summer of 1905294 and again in 1906. The Stolypin regime revived the discipline of and confidence in the Russian empire. Nevertheless, there were new attempts at mutiny in 1912 (as well as strikes all over the empire, after the Lena shootings). The French observers did not regard these as specially dangerous: "The plan was the work of a few Apache sailors, exited by the revolutionaries, mainly Jews ... There are plenty of Jews in the Crimea, and they make the sailors believe that they, being better educated than the soldiers, are the elite of the nation, the vanguard of progress ... They menaced with terrible punishment those sailors who did not wish to join them ... A certain proof that their influence was not prevalent was the fact that the sailors who drew the lot to commence the rebellion denouced the instigators . . . "295 This report must reflect the view prevalent in the leading spheres of the doomed empire: there was nothing wrong, no radical need of reform, with Tsarism; the malcontents were Jews or members of other alien minorities; centralization and Russification was the way to revival. — The next year was reported to have been more peaceful, although many dangerous

292 Continued 1899 42,160 1904 68,381 1906 44,147 1910 44,293 1914 50,000 (forecast) Naval attaché to navy minister 3.XII 1904. "Au sujet du personnel". SHM BB 7 n:o 67 e 1 "Forces navales" 1906. SHM BB 7 n:o 75 e 2-13 "Rapport annuel" 1910. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 r 293 "Rapport de fin de mission" 1.II 1911. SHM BB 7 n:o 121 b 294 Naval attaché to navy minister 1.VII 1905. SHM BB 7 n:o 67 e 2 295 "Personnel". Naval attaché to navy minister 17.VI 1913. SHM BB 7 n:o 122 a 149 men remained in service because of the high percentage of working men among the sailors; and the civilian strikes were continuing.296 Discipline seemed good, but was in many cases only external, correct in appearances only, because many men were suffering from a loss of morale.297 Of the other national minorities the navy was most closely concerned with the Finns, because their autonomy covered also the pilot and lighthouse service. The latter were put under the Russian navy ministry in 1912, with the consequent resignation of Finnish pilots and a heightened anti-Russian agitation in the Grand Duchy. "The Finnish question is one of the gravest for the Russian chauvinists . . ."298

6.4. Coastal Defences

After Tsushima the Russian navy did not amount to much for many years. The old battleships remained in the Black Sea, of course. But only a few ships were stationed in the Baltic Sea, for instance, to serve in the patrol to prevent the Finns from smuggling weapons for their supposed rebellion in 1906-1907.299

296 "Rapport annuel" 1913. SHM BB 7 n:o 122 b 297 "Renseignements generaux". Naval attaché to navy minister 27.X 1913. SHM BB 7 n:o 122 c 298 "Service du pilotage de la Finlande". Naval attaché to navy minister 16/29 II 1912. SHM BB 7 n:o 121 k M.J. Claire (consul in Helsinki) to Poincare 17.VI 1912. SHM BB 7 n:o 121 299 Baltic squadron in 1906 20 torpedo cruisers 21 torpedo boats of 350 t 10 motor boats of 35 t "Escadre de Defence de la Baltique". Naval attaché to navy minister 6.IV 1906. SHM BB 7 n:o 75-13 Black Sea fleet in 1906 Rostislav Dvenacat' Apostolov battleships Tri Svjatelija Panteleimon

150 For several years only a few ships were added to the strength; they were the two pre-dreadnoughts which had been launched according to pre-war programmes.'°° The Baltic fleet was looked upon mainly as a training squadron. But in the event of war it might have made a few raids on the German coast to make the Germans divide their forces instead of concentrating the whole of their fleet in the North Sea.301 For several years coastal defence depended on army units, as has been made clear elsewhere in this work, so that two or three army corps were held in the vicinity of St. Petersburg, weakening the concentration of forces in the principal theatre of war. At first the line of defence ran from Kymijoki to Narva. In 1909 fortifications were started at Ino, near Terijoki to the north of Kronstadt, and at Krasnye Gorki.302 (map 28) Libau was abandoned. It had been a naval base for action on the oceans against England and/or Japan. But its passages tended to silt up, and it was much too close to the German

299 Continued Tsesma with 600 convicts Saratov with 60 convicts transports and school ships Oeakov "excessively ill-used under the efemeral command of Lieutenant Schmidt". "Quelques. renseignements sur la Marine Russe en Mer Noire". 30. V 1906. SHM BB 7 n:o 75-13 300 Baltic fleet in 1911 Battleship squadron Tsesarevi6 battleships Slava Andrei Pervozvannyi Imperator Pavel I Rurik light cruiser Cruiser squadron Gromoboi Bajan Pallada Admiral Makarov 4 torpedo boat divisions 6 submarines "of unsatisfactory construction" (1910) 6 minelayers I reserve five old battleships II reserve Imperator Alexander II "Forces navales". Naval attaché to navy minister 26.III 1911. SHM BB 7 n:o 121 d "Etat des sous-marins" 12.V 1910. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 o 301 "Rapport annuel" 1913. SHM BB 7 n:o 122 b 302 "Rapport annuel" 8.I 1910. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 r 151 border and impossible of defence landwards unless fortifications were constructed with a radius of 12 kilometres and at a cost of hundreds of millions of roubles. The ancient fort at the mouth of the Duna was also declassified.3°3 However, in step with Russia's revival, the coastal defences on the Gulf on Finland were pushed westwards, to the line of Porkkala-Nargen, where powerful fortifications began to be built on the eve of the war (planned for completion in 1920). The main naval base was to be at Reval, with a supporting base for lighter forces at Sveaborg; Kronstadt was to remain the principal base for construction and major repairs. Flanking positions were planned in Moonsound and Åland or Hanko.304 As far as Åland was concerned, it had to be a floating base because of the difficulties arising from the demilitarization of the Islands, decreed in the Åland Convention in Paris in 1856.3°6 The summer manoeuvres of the Baltic fleet were always undertaken on the theme of the defence of the Gulf of Finland against superior forces, and were to prevent the enemy from taking possession of landing beaches. The destroyer and submarine flotillas, based at Helsinki and Reval, were in contact with observation posts, and were ready to proceed against the enemy. The torpedo boats practised attacks against armoured ships; the Finnish archipelago was an excellent shelter for them against pursuing cruisers."' Watching the coasts caused much effort, the Finnish coasts "surprisingly much", it was admitted to the French attaché. That was because the coast line of Finland was exceptionally broken, with innumerable passages. A further reason was the lack of confidence of the imperial government in the loyalty of the Finns. That was why the navy ministry wanted to organize the coastal guard so as to be free from the influence of the Helsinki officials. The coast was divided into sectors, with headquarters in Reval, Kronstadt, and Sveaborg. These

303 "Rapport annuel" 1908. SHM BB 7 n:o 75 i "Voyage a Libau". Naval attaché to navy minister 26.X 1909. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 d 3°4 "Rapport annuel" 1913. SHM BB 7 n:o 122 b 3°6 Pertti Luntinen, The Åland Question During the Last Years of the Russian Empire. The Slavonic and East European Review 4/1976 306 "Rapport du fin de mission 1.II 1911". SHM BB 7 n:o 121 c 152 measures were an indication of the fear of a German landing on the coasts, threatening the capital, and which a non-existent Russian navy was unable to oppose.307 A similar organization of the coastal guard was centred at Sevastopol and Kertch.308 Otherwise, surprisingly little was reported in respect of precautions on the Black Sea. Apparently, the Turkish fleet was no menace comparable to the German one, nor could Russia be threatened so vitally on the Black Sea coast as it could in St. Petersburg. All these measures of coastal defence were intended to be temporary, however, for Russia could not remain satisfied with her impotence at sea.

6.5. Naval Policy

After Tsushima there was much opposition against rebuilding the navy. It was believed that while the land troops were vital for Russia, a fleet was only a secondary element, and one in conflict with Russian tradition: the fleet had previously existed only for moving troops along the coasts, with the severe winters restricting its usefulness. The big navy of the turn of the century had been a luxury for the empire, a facade of might.309 The French atteche felt that in many political spheres people were convinced of the absolute futility of constructing powerful battleships for Russia; the money would be better used for the construction of railways, thus enabling the exploitation of Russia's resources.310 But the emperor demanded a powerful navy worthy of the great empire and its world role. The foreign office was also interested in an ever growing navy as a factor enhancing the prestige of their diplomatists. The break-up of the Russo-

307 "Nouvelle organisation de la surveillance des cotes". Naval attaché to navy minister 5.III 1910. 308 = 307 309 "Rapport annuel" 17.IV 1908. SHM BB 7 n:o 75 i 300 "Rapport annuel" 8.I 1910. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 r 153 Austrian entente made the Black Sea fleet more important than earlier, while the question of keeping open the Danish Straits and remilitarising the Åland Islands made it important to make Russia's voice heard in the Baltic.311 Of course, the navy, with navy minister as its spokesman, demanded a powerful fleet of big ships, "demonstrating the vanity and amour-propre of the navy and the emperor", in the opinion of the critics. Russia did not want to be the only great power without Dreadnoughts.312 A League for the Restoration of the Navy — apparently modelled on the Flottenverein — had been founded in 1906 to propagate the idea of a powerful commercial and naval fleet. "Its spirit of chauvinism and patriotic pride are laudable, but it desires a naval development incommensurate with the financial possibilities of the country and its political needs", the attaché had to admit. The League was influential among Russian youth and especially among the naval circles and Duma representatives.'" Naval opinion was that any system other than an open sea fleet for the defence of the coasts was an illusion. The light flotillas, the fixed defences, the batteries could only be auxiliaries for an active fleet, but were unable to replace it. Any attempt to defend the coast was foredoomed without mastery of the sea. Manifold arguments were given for the great programme of naval rebuilding presented to the Duma. A mighty navy was the symbol of a great power, as Captain Mahan was preaching: it was not merely a question of prestige or amour-propre, but of concrete interests, of being heard when problems of vital concern to Russia were being discussed by the great powers. Further, though Russia was peaceful, peace was not dependent on Russia alone; therefore, she had to prepare for the worst. The Pacific and the Black Sea were not to be forgotten, but the mastery of the Baltic was decisive even in regard to the other

311 = 309 312 = 310 313 "Ligue pour la renovation de la flotte". Naval attaché to navy minister 311 1910. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 d

154 theatres of war, because it guaranteed Russia's political independence and the world peace, essential for her commercial, industrial, social, intellectual, and political development. It also ensured the dependence of the Baltic provinces and Finland, and was the supporting basis of Russia's historical interests in the East. Russia must not neglect the development. of her naval might while her neighbours were making such efforts to augment their naval armaments. Refusal would imply that Russia was continental power without maritime interests, or that she was unable to defend her vital interests.31' The pre-eminence of the Baltic fleet reflected the consciousness of Germany as Russia's principal enemy. The French naval attaché sketched the eventual use of the navy in some detail: Sweden was flirting with Germany and was clearly inimical to Russia, as was proved by the anti-Russian tone of that country's naval propaganda. Then there were the separatist tendencies in Finland since 1905. It was understandable if Russia was seriously concerned about the northern Baltic Sea. The planned Russian Baltic fleet was to neutralize Swedish combinations with the Germans and the Finns, and to immobilize part of the German fleet in the Baltic Sea. On the Black Sea Constantinople (i.e. the Straits) remained Russia's objective. There had been a moment during the Balkan wars when the conquest of the city (by the Bulgarians) had seemed imminent. The Russian Black Sea fleet had been animated with a desire to advance to the Straits,315 but then maintenance of the status quo had been seen to be a more useful objective for Russia until she was further strengthened. Austria being Russia's principal opponent in the south, the French attaché hoped that the Russian fleet would help in neutralizing the Austrian fleet and thus aiding the French to win the domination of the Mediterranean. The Russian role in the Pacific was much more modest than before the war, but the Russians had not given up their dreams.

314 "Projet de loi sur le programme naval de la flotte Russe". Naval attaché to navy minister 26.III 1913. 315 Naval attaché to navy minister 11.IV 1913. SHM BB 7 n:o 122 c 155 It was proved by the voyage of a couple of gunboats along the north-east passage, and the idea of putting diesels in the new dreadnoughts to make possible the 18 000 sea-mile voyage without coaling, thus avoiding the nightmare of Ro2estvenskii.316 The ship-building programme was presented to the Duma as an answer to the German menace against the Russian capital and in the Baltic Sea at large. But in fact grand imperialist dreams in the Near East and the Far East were involved in the naval revival.

6.6. The Naval Convention Signed

The Dual Alliance again began to be strengthened in 1912, and one part of the process was the signing of a naval convention between France and Russia. This was analoguous to the military convention, allowing for naval co-operation in case of war, and preparatory discussion between the naval chiefs of staff.'" These discussions shed additional light on the ideas Russian admirals had for the use of their future armadas. The first discussion was held in the summer 1912 between Prince Liewen and Admiral Aubert. Liewen explained that in a war against the Triple Alliance the first task of the Russian navy would be to secure the freedom of the Black Sea, in order to be able to transport supplies for the land operations. Losing mastery of the Black Sea would mean disastrous consequences for the outcome of the whole campaign. Russia always aimed at maintaining a naval superiority of one and a half times the Turkish fleet on the Black Sea. If the Italian and Austrian fleets should be immobilized by the French navy, Russia's prospects on the Black Sea would be good. The situation would be completely transformed if these enemies succeeded in passing the Straits with the connivance of the Turks.

316 "Rapport annuel" 9.XII 1912. SHM BB 7 n:o 121 e 317 Navy minister to MAE 10.II 1912. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 "Projet de conventation navale". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41, DDF III/3, n:o 206

156 The French admiral declared that it was the intention of the first French fleet to destroy or to blockade the enemy fleets in their Mediterranean bases. The French were going to prevent the Italian and Austrian fleets from concentrating their forces in the Ionian Sea; the enemy would not be able to reach the Dardanelles without being engaged in battle. Aubert made one reservation, however. The Anglo-French entente might impose some other objective on his fleet, and therefore he was not able to promise unconditional help in the case of Austro-Italian action against the Dardanelles. If Austria should act in concert with Turkey while Italy maintained an offensive against or a threatening posture towards France, the situation would be serious for the Russians, too. It would be difficult for the French to leave the western Mediterranean without being assured of Italian neutrality. But the very fact of the French fleet being concentrated at Bizerta might intimidate the Austrians from acting. The Russians would be able to support the French in the Mediterranean only after passing the Straits and having secured their communications by occupying the coasts of the passage. This presupposed complete mastery of the Black Sea. Thus, concentrating the French fleet at Bizerta was the practical measure that corresponded best to all hypotheses and agreed best with Russia's strategic interests. In the north the Russians would not be able to engage in active operations until 1916 or 1917, when the new battleships should be completed. Therefore Liewen asked for a French demonstration on the Swedish coast, which would distract the Swedes from their schemes in Finland and would thus free the Russian army corps immobilized in the north. This the French admiral was not able to promise, having agreed with the British to concentrate the French navy in the Mediterranean, while the British operated in the Channel and in the North Sea. The French attaché gathered some further information in St. Petersburg. It was learned that the Russians were going to employ their ancient cruisers and torpedo-boats to keep the Swedes respectful. The new battleships, when completed, would probably base their operations on Reval. Thus the Germans would have to divide their navy into two parts, one 157 against the Russians and the other against the British.318 Prince Liewen sketched out also a plan of action should the Russian Baltic fleet not be engaged in the North and could be transferred elsewhere. The fleet would then act in the Mediterranean and needed a base there. Liewen asked whether Bizerta could be made available for the Russians. The French admiral was not too eager to promise this and saw some practical difficulties; but he did not refuse in principle. In the Far East the Russian and French naval forces were found to be too weak and too far from each other to be able to take part in joint offensive action.319 But "the hope of reconstructing the Pacific squadron remained anchored in the soul of Russian sailors and statesmen".'" Poincare proposed that the naval convention should be incorporated in the diplomatic alliance, as the military convention had been incorporated in 1899 by an exchange of letters between Murav'ev and Delcasse. Sazonov accepted the proposal, and so did the emperor. The president of the council of ministers Kokovtsov saw only advantage in the approval of the naval convention by the governments, for otherwise "these gentlemen (i.e. the admirals) are capable of reckless engagements. They talk and talk, not being preoccupied by financial or even diplomatic considerations. Now they have discussed Turkey, Sweden, and who knows what else. They will carry us too far".321 Kokovtsov's words reflect the lack of coherent leadership in the "autocratic" Russian government. The principle of unified government, which Stolypin had tried to realize, did not work very well under Kokovtsov because of imperial obstruction. Military, naval, and diplomatic questions, being the prerogative of the emporor, in particular escaped Kokovtsov's control. Only

318 "Premier echange de vues strategiques entre les chefs d'état-major general de la marine imperiale russe et le shef d'état-major de la marine francaise". Paris 6.VII 1912. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 319 = 318 320 "Bulletin annuel" 1912. EMATSH 7 N 1539 321 "Voyage de M. Poincare en Russie aoüt 1912. Entretien avec M. Sazonoff. Entretien avec M. Kokovtzoff. Enretien avec l'Empereur". AMAE, C.P. Russ- ie N.S. 41. DDF III/3. n:o 264

158 financial considerations compelled the respective ministers to take into account the opinion of the minister of finance and the Duma. The naval convention was one additional fact convincing the Germans of the reality of the Einkreisung. The German fleet saluted the warship which carried Poincare, thus demonstrating the fact that the French and the Russians were unable to communicate with each other without encountering German might. The German fleet was able to close or to open the Baltic route.322 But the fact that they felt the need to demonstrate anything proved that "Germany, notwithstanding her success, her wealth, her power, felt a parvenue in the society of nations",323 When the German ambassador asked for an explanation of the naval convention, he was told in effect that it was none of his business: "Russia and France, being allies, have the right to preview all eventualities on land and sea, but nothing has been altered in the peaceful character of their alliance".324

Nicholas II was "too busy" to receive the ambassador.

6.7. Building Programmes

At first the Duma was reluctant to appropriate money for the notoriously corrupt naval administration. But as the navy was reformed, especially when Admiral Grigorovic was appointed navy minister in 1911; and as the financial situation of the imperial treasury improved, the estimates were increased. They increased at a faster rate than in other comparable powers:

322 Ambassador in Berlin to MAE 17.VIII 1912. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 323 Ambassador in Berlin to MAE 4. VIII 1912. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 324 "Voyage de M. Poincare ... Entretien avec M. Sazonoff" 159 The Naval Estimates of some Principal Sea Powers 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 USA 518 638 712 683 658 million Germany 348 424 504 542 563 580 roubles France 312 320 334 371 412 426 Russia 223 255 241 245 304 349 692 325

The technical committee of the Admiralty demanded mighty armoured ships of 20 000 tons as early as 1906.326 The German firm Blohm & Voss was left out of account through French protests, and the ships were planned by the Italian constructor Admiral Cuniberti, father of the dreadnought idea. They were built in Russia by Russian workmen and with Russian materials.327 The ships were much more expensive for Russia than for the other powers because of the feeble productivity of Russian labour and the dependence on foreign parts and expertise.328 They were also very slow in building, because the technical committee kept modifying the plans, and because of Russian sloth, lack of energy, numerous church holidays, and general inefficiency, as well as continuous corruption.329 In the year 1909 four dreadnoughts of 23 000 tons were laid down .in the Baltic (the "Gangut"-class) and in 1911 three similar battleships (of 22 800 tons) for the Black Sea as an answer to the Turkish naval programme.330 These plans presupposed enlarging the building slips and docks in St. Petersburg, Kronstadt, Sevastopol, and Nikolaev. Also a floating base for Åland was ordered, to consist of seven transports for various purposes.331 In 1912 Admiral Grigorovie

325 "Bulletin annuel" 1912. EMATSH 7 N 1539 326 "Constructions neuves". Naval attaché to navy minister 16.X1 1906. SHM BB 7 n:o 75-13 327 "Constructions neuves". Naval attaché to navy minister 21.IX 1908. SHM BB 7 n:o 75 f 328 "Bulletin annuel" 1912. EMATSH 7 N 1539 329 "Recapitulation" 1909. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 f "Discussion du budget au conseil de l'empire". Naval attaché to navy minis- ter 21.IV 1910. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 330 "Rapport annuel" 1.I 1911. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 r "Au sujet des constructions navales" Naval attaché to navy minister 8.IX 1910. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 o 331 "Budget naval demande pour 1908". Naval attaché to navy minister 24.I 1907. SHM BB 7 n:o 75 c "Credits de la Marine et constructions navales". Naval attaché to navy minister 19.VIII 1908. SHM BB 7 n:o 75 c. "Bases flottantes". Naval attaché to navy minister 4.II 1908. SHM BB 7 n:o 75 f

160 10 succeeded in obtaining the sanction of the Duma for four battlecruisers of 32 000 tons (the "Borodino"-class), with light cruisers, destroyers, and submarines.332 This "small programme" was to be completed by 1917. It was only a first step towards the mighty Russian fleet, as its very name suggests,333 but in 1917 the empire would already have had "a respectable embryo fleet".334 The "grand programme" was presented and accepted in 1913-1914. By 1924 the Baltic fleet was to consist of two squadrons of battleships and a division of battlecruisers, 24 dreadnoughts in all. By 1930 there was to be 24 superdreadnoughts of 31 000-34 000 tons, and twelve dreadnoughts in reserve squadrons, in all 36 big ships. Four ships were to be launched annually, battleships and battlecruisers alternatingly. The battle squadrons were to be

332 "Rapport annuel, Materiel militaire". SHM BB 7 n:o 75 i "Sous-marins de haute mer russes". Naval attaché to navy minister 28.VIII 1910. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 o "Sous-marins defensifs". Naval attaché to navy minister 12.V 1910. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 o "Note sur l'etat des constructions neuves en Russie". Naval attaché to navy minister 21.II 1910. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 o 333 The Russian naval plans are dealt with in detail by Petrov, Podgotovka ..., and Sacillo,• Russkii imperializm 334 Projected Russian fleet in 1917 Baltic fleet 2 battleships 17,300 t. (pre-dreadnoughts) 4 battleships 23,000 (Ganguts) 2 battleships 13,500 (old?) 4 battle cruisers 32,000 (Borodinos) 1 cruiser 18,000 3 cruisers 8,000 (Bajans) 4 cruisers 6,000 37 destroyers 1,200 — 1,300 t "numerous" —"— 400 — 600 t

Black Sea fleet 3 battleships 13,000 t (pre-dreadnoughts) 3 battleships 22,800 2 cruisers 6,700 2 cruisers 6,000 9 destroyers 1,000 18 torpedo-boats 380 — 600 t 12 submarines 600 — 700 t

"Rapport annuel" 9.XII 1912. SHM BB n:l 121 e

11 — French information on ... 161 accompanied by 28 light cruisers, 116 destroyers, and 39 submarines.335 The programme for the Black Sea was not as closely detailed; it was only decided that the Black Sea fleet was to be one and a half times stronger than all other Black Sea fleets put together.336 The Balkan wars and Turkey's intention to have - dreadnoughts built in England caused some anxiety in Russia, because her ships could not be constructed with equal speed. Hence it was proposed to buy the Turkish and even Brazilian ships then being built in England. Nothing came of the scheme.337 (The ships served eventually with the Grand Fleet in 1914- 1918). Only six cruisers of 8000 tons were intended for the Pacific, plus gunboats for the Amur river flotilla. By the end of 1913 the Ganguts and the Borodinos were under construction,338 the work proceeding "painfully slowly".

335 Projected Russian fleet in 1924 16 battleships + 2 pre-dreadnoughts in reserve 8 battle cruisers + "Rurik" in reserve 16 light cruisers + 3 in reserve 90 torpedo boats 36 submarines Projected Russian fleet in 1930 16 battleships (superdreadnoughts) 8 battleships in reserve (dreadnoughts) 8 battlecruisers 4 battlecruisers in reserve (Borodinos) 16-20 light cruisers 8-12 light cruisers in reserve 78-80 destroyers 36-45 destroyers in reserve 24-27 submarines 12-15 submarines in reserve "Projet de loi sur le programme naval de la flotte Russe". Naval attaché to navy minister 26.II1 1913. SHM BB 7 n:o 122 b Naval budget for 1914 4 Ganguts 14 million roubles 4 Borodinos 66 million roubles 3 Black Sea ships 39 million roubles Total cost of the grand programme 4,500,000,000 francs "Les constructions navales en 1914". Naval attaché to navy minister 3/16.X 1913. SHM BB 7 n:o 122 b 336 = 335 337 "Au sujet des achats de cuirasses en Angleterre". Naval attaché to navy minister 9/22.1I 1913. SHM BB 7 n:o 122 e 338 "Rapport annuel" 1913. SHM BB 7 n:o 122 b 162 The cruisers and destroyers were hardly laid down, the main effort being concentrated on the big ships. Only a couple of cruisers, a few destroyers and submarines were launched and entered into service before the war. The first Ganguts were completed in 1914 but the Borodinos never. Thus the "grand imperial navy" remained mainly on paper, and its main importance lies in the illustration it provided of Russia's imperial plans and hopes. The giant ships were designed to show the cross of St. Andreas in the distant oceans, they would probably not have been appropriate to the confined waters of the Baltic Sea, not to speak of the Gulf of Finland.

163 7. Preparing for the Great War

7.1. The Dual Alliance Revitalized

In August 1911 Generals 2ilinskii and Dubail had discussed the military convention at the usual annual meeting. The Russian chief of staff had tried to reassure his colleague that Russian support for France was certain, that the emperor was not going back on his word.340 But much anxiety was caused by Potsdam, by the Moroccan crisis, and by the Balkan events, and new exertions were needed before the Dual Alliance was definitely repaired. As a reaction to German behaviour in the Moroccan crisis a national revival was felt in France from 1911 onwards. Poincare, an Alsatian, was made prime minister and then president of the republic. Delcasse was appointed navy minister and then ambassador to St. Petersburg. The army got a competent leader in Joffre, and the three-year service law of 1913 increased its effectives by a third. Poincare visited Russia in the spring of 1912. He had with him a paper sketching the outline of the military situation as the French general staff saw it, to be used as a guide for his discussions with the Russians. The generals wrote that the Germans were well aware of the difficulties the Russians faced in making an offensive. They also knew that they had no hope

340 "Proces-verbal de l'entretien du 18/31 aoüt 1911 entre les chefs de l'etat- major generaux des armees francaise et russe". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 40. DDF XIV/2 n:o 232

164 of decisive results from a German attack on Russia. The Germans had learned of the French decision to attack the Rhine with all their available forces immediately after the declaration of war. They had probably calculated the political and military consequences of the first battle, i.e. the attitude of Belgium, England, and Italy. It was absolutely against German military doctrine to disperse their forces. That is why they had decided to attack France first and in full force. It was a fact that they were only leaving on their eastern frontier a minimal force, incapable of taking the offensive. The information received indicated that Russia was preparing for a battle against both Germany and Austria simultaneously. But Russia was an ally of France. It was in the interest of both countries to fight the principal enemy with united strength, in order not to get beaten separately, one after the other. France was not able to choose the moment of battle; she had to fight immediately and with full force. Consequently it was of primordial importance for Russia to act simultaneusly with France. Even operations of secondary importance could be decisive on condition that they were immediate. Of course, Russia had her problems: the size of the empire, its sparse communications, the form of the Polish salient. But the offensive need not be very powerful at the start. Dragomirov had been of the opinion that Russia had to act immediately whatever the dangers and material results. It was of the utmost importance to make the Germans believe in the seriousness of the attack and thereby to compel them to divide their forces at the beginning of the war. Even preparations that made an immediate Russian attack seem probable might suf- fice for this result."' These arguments were not new. What was new was the urgency with which they were presented. Of course, Poincare was not able to move the Russian colossus at once, on his first visit. But these arguments were repeated on every occasion and little by little they had their effect, in time for the great war — or, of course, one might say that they had their effect in making the great war break out.

341 "Note remise au president du conseil le 3 avril 1912 å l'occasion de son voyage en Russie". EMATSH 7 N 1538 165 Joffre and Zilinskii, the chiefs of the general staffs, took up the discussion of the technical details. First of all they agreed that the term "defensive war" in the convention did not imply a war to be waged defensively. On the contrary, it was absolutely necessary to attack vigorously, and as simultaneously as possible. As always, the defeat of the German army was stated to be the principal aim of the alliance. The German mobilization was to be followed by an instantaneous and simultaneous mobilization in France and in Russia without further consultation; but such a consultation would be necessary before an Austrian or Italian mobilization was answered by a French and Russian mobilization. Joffre insisted that it was the German intention to attack France first, leaving only a minimum of forces in the east. Germany had the greatest interest in being able to fight France first, and only then Russia. The allies had to prevent this by a simultaneous attack from two directions. The French general staff had left only a minimum of troops to guard the Alpine passages — Italy was at this time engaged in a war with Turkey — and concentrated the mass of their army on the German frontier. Its numbers surpassed the 1,300,000 men promised in 1892. The French railways were being improved in order to win an advantage of one or two days over the German troop concentrations. Zilinskii accepted all this, but then he remarked that Austria had remarkably improved her military ability and perfected her railways with an obvious offensive intention. Russia could not afford to expose herself to defeat in the Austrian theatre of war. The moral effect would be disastrous. She had to leave a considerable part of her forces on the souther front. And then, while Sweden had earlier adopted an attitude of wait and see in order to join the winning party at a favourable moment, she had lately been incited by Germany and would probably march against Russia with the Germans. That was why Russia had to keep in Finland and in St. Petersburg considerably more troops than had been deemed necessary earlier. The construction of railways in Asia Minor also allowed the Turks to accelerate their mobilization and troop concentration. Consequently Russia had to maintain large garrison on her Turkish borders. But after repeating these old arguments against concentrating all forces on the German front, Zilinskii went on 166 to say that the Russian general staff had resolutely decided to attack Germany with at least 800,000 men. And the offensive was to be felt by the Germans after the fifteenth day. Joffre remarked that the German defeat would dispel all concern about Swedish or Turkish action, and he again stressed the need to concentrate all efforts against the principal enemy. He also emphasized the necessity to improve the Russian strategic railways so as to accelerate troop concentration. He approved of the plan to put the centre of gravity of the Russian armies close to Warsaw, which would allow an attack towards Allenstein if the Germans were deployed in East Prussia, or an operation on the left bank of the Vistula if the enemy was in the region of Thorn-Posen.'}2 Of course, Zilinskii's promise did not mean that 800,000 men were to attack on the fifteenth day — the attack was only to be felt by the Germans after the fifteenth day. And, as will be recounted later, there was plenty to wish for and to revise in the plans for troop concentration and railway construction before the French could be satisfied. The emphasis on the Austrian, Turkish, and Swedish danger remained in spite of all French efforts to dispel Russian apprehensions by the argument that the first battle would solve all difficulties. But 2ilinskii had agreed on the importance of simultaneous action against Germany. The Dual Alliance had thus returned to the harmony of Obrucev's and Boisdeffre's days. This was no one-sided victory of the French over the Russians. Concentrating against the principal enemy made military sense to the Russian generals, too.

7.2. The Problem of Wartime Communication Between the Allies

From the very beginning of the alliance the problem of wartime communication between France and Russia had been discussed.

342 "Proches-verbal de l'entretien du 13 juillet 1912, entre les chefs d'état- major des armees francaise et russe". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 167 It was obviously important for information on the German army and German war plans to be exchanged between the allies. It was especially important for the Russians to be able to know at the earliest moment whether the principal German offensive was to be directed against France or Russia. Various means of communication were proposed: pigeons, emissaries, agents in neutral countries, and the telegraph cable. But the problem was that Germany and her allies were situated between Russia and France, and the flanking neutrals, Sweden-Norway, Denmark, Greece, and Turkey, were more or less under German influence, or anyway unable to resist German pressure, in the opinion of the Russian generals.343 Experiments were made with . pigeons, on the line Karlskrona—Libau and Karlskrona—Copenhagen. Only 8 pigeons out of 65 arrived at the destination. It was concluded that over the long sea stretches only pigeons of strong muscle could be trusted. A pigeon station was planned in Esbjerg and a Russian consulate was to be established there to act as a cover. The cost of the total line from Libau to Dunkirk was estimated at 500 000 francs. But the ultimate outcome of these experiments and discussions was that communication by pigeon-post was found to be unsatisfactory.'" A cable link was then envisaged. A plan for a special cable from France by the western side of England to Archangel was studied.345 By 1901 opinion leaned in favour of an alternative plan of a cable being layed from Bizerta to Sevastopol. There was to be a cable station at Ergasteria (Greece), and if England remained neutral in the war, the cable would be safe. But continuing the cable through the Straits was highly problematical. And English neutrality was by no means certain at this time. Other means had to be found.346

343 "Communication entre la France et la Russie" s.d. EMATSH 7 N 1507 344 "Communications par pigeons voyageours entre la Russie et la Fance". Mou- lin 20.VI 1898. EMATSH 7 N 1475 "Au sujet des communications entre la France et la Russie". Moulin 24.IX 1898. EMATSH 7 N 1475 "Sur la communication par pigeons-voyageurs avec la Russie". Moulin 10.XII 1898. EMATSH 7 N 1475 345 = 343 346 "Proces-verbal de l'entretien 8/20 II 1901 entre les chefs d'etat-major generaux des armees fransaise et russe". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 35

168 An aerial connection was proposed; aerostations (equipped with dirigible balloons?) were to be constructed. This proposal does not seem to have resulted in anything.347 The key to the solution of the problem lay in the development of wireless telegraphy. At the meeting of the chiefs of staff in 1907 it was suggested that wireless links might be set up from French North Africa to Minsk, Novo-Georgievsk, and Sevastopol.348 At the meeting in 1909 the lack of a wireless telegraphy was discussed anew. The French spoke strongly as Palicyn had wanted in this as well as in the railway question mentioned earlier. "The French general staff was unable to understand" that a problem discussed two years previously had not been advanced to the arrangement of the details for the installation of wireless stations. "The French general staff expects the realization of these requests which they had repeated many times, with an impatience which is more than legitimate"; they "demand emphatically that the Russian government speed up the solution as much as possible".349 The wireless stations were then built and by 1912-1913 communication was functioning satisfactorily. Daily wireless contact was held between Paris—Bobruisk and Bizerta— Sevastopol. The Eiffel Tower—Sveaborg link was experimented with and it was found that the Sveaborg station had to be made more powerful. New powerful stations were being built on the Black Sea coast. Wireless stations in Montenegro and Norway were discussed, but came to nothing. By this time England was no longer a potential enemy. Her cables could be used for communication in case of war. The telegraph connection was to run from Paris through England to America, Australia, and Zanzibar, or through South Africa to Zanzibar and from there to Odessa. The British had suggested a line through Bombay and Teheran to Russia, but the Russians insisted on Odessa. The document does not indicate how the Turkish area was to be cleared.35o

347 =346 348 "Proces-verbal ... 31/18.VII 1907". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 38 348 "Proces-verbal ... 24/11.IX 1908". AMAE. C.P. Russie N.S. 39 358 "Proces-verbal ... 13.VII 1912". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 "Communications entre la France et la Russie, Juillet 1913". EMATSH 7 N 1538

169 Correspondence through emissaries was organized, too. Messages were to be sent by telegraphy to London and from there to the Scandinavian countries, from which officer emissaries were to carry them to Russia.351 Thus it was not until the years 1912-1913 that the Russians could be confident in knowing whether the Germans were attacking France by the time the Russians were to start their own promised offensive against Germany.

7.3. The Russian Army in 1912

Colonel Matton was replaced by General Laguiche in 1912, because Germany was represented by a general in St. Petersburg. Laguiche did not know Russian, but he was aided by Captain Wehrlin who did. In addition a horde of young captains were commanded to Russia to study in the military academy, to visit the military districts, or to observe the manoeuvres. They sent in batches of information to Paris during the years 1912-1914. The numerical strength of the Russian army was impressive.

The Numerical Strength of the Russian army in 1912 active troops 1 230 000 men reserve 3 675 000 militia, trained 828 000 Cossack I 60 000 Cossack II 50 000 Cossack III 53 000 Cossack reserve 53 000 militia I, untrained 3 345 000 militia II, untrained 5 016 000 352 The effectives in active service in 1913 service class of 1910 436 000 men 1911 423 000 1912 435 000

352 = 350 352 "Notice sur l'armee Russe, Mars 1912". EMATSH 7 N 1538

170 in all 1 303 000 of whom in the navy 42 000 frontier guards 56 000 thus left in the army 1 286 000 of whom in Asia 240 000 353

Of the annual class of 1 200 000 men Russia thus conscripted rather fewer than 450 000 recruits for the three years of active service in the infantry or artillery, for the four years in other army branches, or the five years in the navy. Volunteer students could be trained as reserve officers. After the active period the men served 7 years in the first reserve and the 7-8 years in the second reserve and finally 5 years in the militia. Sailors did five years of reserve service only. The Cossacks went through one preparatory year, four years in active units, eight years on leave of absence, five years in the reserve, and finally ten years in the militia. The peacetime infantry units were kept at half the wartime strength. Infantry units had to mobilize themselves if war broke out, and in addition they had to mobilize their supply formations and reserve units. The covering troops on the western border were up to three-fifths or three-quarters of their combat strength, and mobilized only themselves in the event of war. After the reform of 1910 the rule of accepting only 25 % of local national minorities referred solely to the peacetime strength. The four youngest reserve classes (of about 400 000 men each) were enough to make up the active army at mobilization. The rest were left for the reserve divisions. When mobilization occurred, the telegram would be seen by the reservists on the second day at the latest. After that the men would gather at their collection points, and from there they would be transported to their units. Infantry and artillery would be mobilized between third-ninth day (exceptionally by the fifteenth day), reserve troops between the ninth-fifteenth day (exceptionally by the twenty-eighth day). The railway transport from Moscow to Brest took three to

353 "Conferences sur l'armee Russe faites par le capitaine Mahon 1913". EMATSH 7 N 1506

171 five days, from Kazan to Warsaw eight days. One army corps needed 128-142 trains, and while one double line carried 32 trains a day, the corps would occupy the line for four days, and much more where the line was a single-track one, allowing 8-16 trains only. Because there were too few lines leading to the western frontier, several corps had to use one line. Thus the concentration would take from three to four weeks.354 The Russian infantry amounted to 1260 battalions of 800 rifles. They were organized in 70 divisions and 17 rifle brigades of 16 or 8 battalions. The cavalry consisted of 877 squadrons and sotnias of 128 sabres, organized in 24 divisions and 8 brigades. There were 640 batteries of eight or six guns in the artillery. The various services were united in army corps consisting usually of two infantry divisions, sometimes with an additional rifle brigade; a cavalry division; two artillery brigades or 12 field batteries and a few heavy guns; and a sapper battalion.

An example of the battle strength of a Russian army corps 24 squadrons 3,072 sabres 32 battalions 25,600 rifles 12 field batteries 96 cannons 12 mortars 72 machine guns 3 heavy batteries 24 cannons 1 sapper battalion

There were 27 army corps in European Russia, three corps in Caucasia, two in Turkestan, and five in Siberia. Each army corps was to mobilize itself an in addition a division of first and a division of second reserve. An army consisted of 3-5 corps, with one brigade of heavy artillery, one pontoon battalion, railway battalion(s), a wireless company, a balloon detachment and a squadron of gendarmes. These grand units did not exist in peacetime. The army staffs were to be formed out of the military district staffs during the mobilization. Local brigades and commandants were charged with the task of keeping an eye on the recruits and reservists. The militia formed 20 mixed divisions on mobilization (4 regiments, 1

354 Capitaine Wehrlin; "Les caracteristiques de 1'armee Russe 1912". EMATSH 7 N 1535

172

artillery group, 1 cavalry regiment, 1 sapper company) from the first call-up and 20 divisions from the second call-up. In addition there were 54 000 frontier guards. They served under the command of the ministry of finance, which was charged with the customs and frontier establishment. The guards in Manchuria were organized militarily, their numbers equalling that of an army corps.355

ass Note sur l'action militaire de la Russie en Europe, aoüt 1912-Mars 1913. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 Tables by Wehrlin, "Les caracteristiques ..." = 354 Effectives in Russian army units battalion 800 rifles rifle regiment 1,600 rifles 2 battalions infantry regiment 3,200 rifles 4 battalions 4 machine guns squadron 128 sabres cavalry regiment 768 6 squadrons battery 8 cannons artillery group 24 3 batteries artillery brigade 48 6 batteries infantry division 4 regiments rifle brigade 4 rifle regiments cavalry division 24 squadrons or sotnias 3 cavalry regiments and 1 Cossack regiment cavalry brigade 2 regiments The strength of the active Russian army in 1912 in Europe 53 divisions (47 infantry 3 Guards 3 Grenad) Caucasia 6 Siberia 11 Europe 9 rifle brigades Caucasia 2 Turkestan 6 Europe 19 cavalry divisions (incl. 2 Cossack div.) 4 cavalry brigades Caucasia 4 cavalry divisions (incl. 3 Cossack div.) Turkestan 1 cavalry division 2 Cossack brigades Siberia 2 Cossack brigades 449 field batteries 53 horse batteries 46 mountain batteries 71 mortar batteries 21 heavy batteries Kronstadt 6 fortress artillery battalions Vladivostok 12 European frontiers 38 173

The troops were armed with the 7.62 mm rifle of the 1891 model and the light cannon of 76.2 mm. The cavalry fought with sabre and carabine, the Cossacks had their lance. A novelty was the machine gun. In the Manchurian war they had nominally had one company of eight machine guns for each division or brigade, and six machine guns for each cavalry regiment; in practice all units had not received these new weapons. By 1906 nominal strength was 4 machine guns for each regiment, and from 1911 onwards one company for each regiment.356 This was much less than the Germans had when the war began. Another novelty, in respect of which the experience of the Far East war had proved useful, was the adoption of a uniform in protective colouring. One such was being adopted by most armies, but the French could not understand it: "Evidently, the soldier is not visible, but when all

3" Continued Caucasia 5 fortress artillery battalions Turkestan 1 39 sapper battalions 9 pontoon battalions 16 balloon detachments 13 railway battalions 7 wireless companies 4 siege detachments 17 fortress sapper companies 16 mine companies 13 telegraphy companies 11 pigeon stations The military districts in Europe St. Petersburg Vilna Warsaw Kiev Odessa Moscow Kazan 27 army corps Caucasia 3 Turkestan 2 in Siberia Omsk 1 division 16 batls. Irkutsk II corps 32 III 32 Amur I 32 in Nikolaevsk IV 32 Vladivostok V 32 Habarovsk 5 army corps 356 "Mitrailleuses'. 9. II 1912. EMATSH 7 N 1539 174 armies have adopted it, there are bound to occur innumerable and demoralizing mistakes. It seems better not to proceed too fast in this direction ..."35; There was something untraditional and unmilitary in the drab dress. And it is true that the French poilus were easily distinguished by the German machine gunners in August 1914. Of course, enough Russians were killed in spite of their protective colouring. A totally new branch of military service was aviation. By March 1912 there were 7 balloon companies in European Russia, 1 in Caucasia, and 4 in Siberia. Great dirigible balloons were being constructed in 1912 and 1913. There were aviation schools in Hatsina and Sevastopol, and aviation companies of 7 squadrons each in St. Petersburg, Kiev, and Sevastopol. Each squadron consisted of eight aeroplanes, and more were being constructed. Three factories in St. Petersburg were building Nieuport-, Farman-, Hanriot-, and Voisin-types. Combined manoeuvres had taken place with aeroplanes and ships, although without decisive results.358 Sikorsky had constructed- his giant "Ilja Muromec". This grandfather of all strategic bombers carried 1000 kg of bombs but flew only 75 km/h.359 The general impression received by the French observers was that "the Russian army seems, in its present state, able to fight succesfully against its eventual enemies. The Russian soldier is first class, tough, well trained, disciplined, and devoted. The immense majority of the army is animated by an excellent spirit ... It could be among the first armies of the world if it were able to take all advantage of the excellent elements it has. But the natural unconcern of the Slav charachter has let bad habits seep into the army. There is much good will to regain the distance lost in the war of 1904-1905, but it is frustrated by

357 "Rapport du capitaine Marchal, stagiaire dans 1'armee Russe en 1912". EMATSH 7 N 1486 355 "Bulletin annuel 1912". EMATSH 7 N 1539 359 "Aerostations, Automobilies, TSF 1906-1914". EMATSH u N 1540 175 the absence of method, useless employment of men and resources ..."36° Perhaps the observers, guests of the army, were too polite to report on the widespread misuse of alcohol which seems to have been one of the worst failings of the officer corps.36' Many problems remained. "The high command is being rejuvenated", ran the French report, but the new commanders came from the old schools, the Guards and the general staff. The staff officers were "intelligent and diligent men, but with little experiment of troop command, office workers rather than field officers". Regimental officers were often without orders, they lacked initiative, and went by regulations and habits.362 The immense number of men withdrawn from training into the supply services was also noted: hardly 10 % of the effectives appeared on the training ground. The fighting troops had to give up men for many essential services — the secretariat, the medical services, the upkeep of armament and equipment as well as of the barracks.363 Much work was being done to create a clear doctrine of war for the whole of the Russian army, and inspiration was sought in German and French ideas: "They have not enough confidence in themselves. They are inclined to have an exaggerated idea of the value of the German army, which they are too eager to copy. Thereby their morale suffers and they tend to assume a defensive attitude .. ."364 It is no wonder that the main defect of Russia's military might, her incapacity to wage a prolonged war, due to industrial and social backwardness, was not noted by the observers. A long war was not exptected by anyone. The experiences of the USA

360 "Rapport du capitaine Perchement å la suite du stage accompli dans la cir- conscription de Vilna d'Avril å Octobre 1912". EMATSH 7 N 1486 361 John Bushnell, The Tsarist Officer Corps 1881-1914; Customs, Duties, Inefficiency. The American Historical Review, Oct 1981, p. 754-780 362 "Rapport du capitaine Perchement ..." and "Rapport sommaire du Capitai- ne Perchement" 10.X 1912. EMATSH 7 N 1486 363 = 362 364 "Rapport sommaire du capitaine Marchal, stagiaire dans l'arm@e Russe, cir- conscription du Moscou, de le Avril au le Octobre 1912". EMATSH 7 N 1486

176 11 in the Civil War years of 1861-1865 or Russia in 1904-1905 were not taken in account, because these were non-European wars. The lightning Prussian wars of 1864, 1866 and 1870- 1871 were the relevant models. The observes, French staff officers, had recieved no training in economic warfare or observing social phenomena, of course. They prepared for the one great battle at the opening of the war. They did notice the threat to discipline caused by the revolutionary epidemic. In their opinion it especially contaminated the technical services. They reported on the naval mutinies of 1912, (p. 149) and commented: "In spite of the official silence, and affirmations in the press that the crews are completely calm, there are serious reasons for apprehension ..."365 But these disorders in the fleet and in some engineer units "must not be given more importance than they deserve. They were due to particular reasons, mainly to the social origins of the rebels, most of whom are factory workers."' It seems that even workers were held to be outsiders, like Jews, whose malcontent was not to be taken as a proof that there was something thoroughly wrong with Russia.

7.4. The Problem of the Nationalities Still Unresolved

The national minorities of Russia — Poles, the various Finnish tribes, Letts, Tartars, Jews, Germans, Armenians, Persians, Gypsies, Greeks, etc. etc. — consisted more than 30 % of the population. The French observers seem to have come to the conclusion that the national minorities caused more problems to Russian army than did the revolutionaries.

365 "Bulletin annuel 1912". EMATSH 7 N 1539 366 "Rapport du capitaine Perchement . . ." = 362

12 — French information on ... 177 "The result of this ethnic diversity is that Russia, in spite of her strong political organization, lacks unity ... The Russian race proper — the Great Russians, the White Russians, and the Little Russians or Ukrainians — which forms two-thirds of the population, is thus encircled by a cordon of other nationalities, sometimes loyal or indifferent, but sometimes hostile or even dangerous". That was the reason for the rule that all units must consist at least three-quarters of Russians, and the remaining quarter must not be all composed of the same minority race; and that the natives of a border region must serve their time far from their province of origin. Thus military service was intended as an instrument for Russifying the various elements. The Poles were always a problem. Regiments in the Polish salient consisted nearly exclusively of Russians. There were few Poles and no Jews. But the greater part of the reservists to be called up in the event of a mobilization were Poles. The officers of these units were apprehensive, and asked themselves whether the Russian core was strong enough to absorb the Polish contingent of up to 80 reservists per company. After the reform of 1905 a Russo-Polish detente had seemed possible, but the favourable attitude (of the Poles or Russians? or both?) did not last long. "At present we (the Poles) live under a regime of perpetual tracasserie". The Russians for their part "don't express any sympathy towards their Polish subjects". The Poles regarded the Russian army as wretched and had a low opinion of the Russians from the point of view of morals, corruption etc., "but they are blinded by hate, having nothing to envy the Russians in this respect".": There were Austrian and German Poles in the enemy armies, and the enemy itself, Austria or Germany, was not antipathetic to the Poles. "During the Bosnian crisis they would have greeted the Austrians with an open heart". Germany did not enjoy so great a sympathy in Poland, but she was admired because of her might and commercial and military prestige. The sympathy of the Jews was without reserve on the side of Germany. The Russians and sometimes also the Poles had a

367 "Rapport du capitaine Marchal" (= 3J7), annexe 6.

178 profound contempt for them, but they could not live without the Jews, because without them the country could not be run. "Certainly the influence of this element is not to be despised because of the embarrasments of all kinds that it may create for the Russians. I have heard from a reliable source that in case of a war certain railway lines would be destroyed by the Jews". A glimpse of the conditions the Jews had to live in can be seen in this description of Poland as a theatre of war: "Only the dwellings of the Christian population can be counted on (for billeting and feeding the troops), because the houses of the Jews are so crowded and so filthy, and their food is so miserable, even in the great cities, that quartering troops in the Jewish sections is absolutely impossible".368 French commentators were well aware, too, that the situation in Finland was a cause for serious concern. The Finns were still not Russified by national service. "The population of Finland, although forming part of the Russian empire, according to the 1809 peace treaty of Fredrikshamn, does not perform any military service, paying instead the contribution of the 'military millions' to the Russian treasury",369 It was decided to transfer two parishes on the Russian border from the administration of the Grand Duchy to the Government of St. Petersburg because they were in the district of the new coastal fortifications. This caused an uproar in the Finnish opinion. The French observer commented: "It is of no importance to us who is right, but the fact is that because of two parishes this country is in a state of intensive agitation, and in the event of a war should need two army corps to maintain her in submission. A friend of mine, a general, who had visited Abo, said to me that his Swedish friends had

368 = 367 369 "Conferences sur l'armee Russe faites par le Capitaine Mahon 1913". EMATSH 7 N 1506 179 to accompany him on his walk to avoid his being insulted by the Finns. This is an example of the sentiments of this population, which is renowned for its brutal obstinacy". Of course, the Russian government had no intention of considering the restitution of Finnish autonomy, and the whole of the Viipuri government was decided to be put under direct Russian administration. Thus the situation remained precarious. Colonel Janin continues: "The agitation seems unlikely to calm down, on the contrary. It is the Finnish blood that is to be let first, said a well-connected general of the Guards".37° The Finnish question, as we have seen, was linked up in the Russian mind with the Swedish threat.

7.5. A Catalogue of Enemies

Sweden was afraid of a Muscovite offensive to the northern Atlantic. That is why the Swedish army was modernized, the northern border of the country fortified at Boden, and the navy strengthened, with a national subscription because the government and the Riksdag were not generous enough. The Russification of Finland was seen as the first step in Russia's march to the Atlantic.37' From the St. Petersburg horizon these Swedish preparations seemed in turn an indication of offensive intentions. The Russians knew that Denmark and Norway were not able to defend themselves against German pressure. Germany was known to be dreaming of a northern Germanic union, which would give her twelve million new subjects of a superior race, the Norwegian fjords, the Baltic Straits, and Swedish military strength. Denmark and Norway had only about 60 000 men

37o Janin to Vignal 15-18.IX 1911. EMATSH 7 N 1485 371 M. Clausse, chargé d'affaires å Stockhol to Pichon 14.I 1911. EMATSH 7 N 1544

180 each in their armed forces, but the Swedish army consisted of six active divisions or 120 000 men with additional local units for defence. It was believed that the Swedish army was going to invade Finland while the mass of the Russian army was engaged elsewhere, thereby creating a diversion in the north and menacing the Russian capital. Germany was known to have promised the restitution of Finland to Sweden at the end of the war.372 "The Russian government does not ignore the fact that an alleged secret treaty exists between Sweden and Germany." That was one of the reasons for reinforcing the Russian Baltic fleet.' It was also the reason why Russia would dearly have loved to ignore the prohibition of 1856, which prevented her from occupying or fortifying the Åland Islands against a Swedish attack or as a base for Russian operations. But Swedish and British prostests had forced Russia to give up her attempt in 1907 to occupy the islands under the pretext of watching the revolutionary smuggling of weapons on the Baltic Sea. The northern menace was one of the main reasons for constructing the fortifications on the coasts of the Gulf of Finland mentioned earlier, as well as for several naval plans. Swedish animosity gave credence to the wildest reports of the supposed Finnish rebellion. The worst consequence of the northern menace was the fact that Russia had to keep considerable body of active forces in the vicinity of St. Petersburg, away from the decisive battle-point of the principal front. Turkey was held to be a German instrument. Her intervention in a Russo-German war was probable. Her enmity, with the unreliability of the Caucasian populations, bound the two Caucasian corps to the Caucasian frontier. But it was hoped that the third Caucasian corps from the northern slope of the Caucasus would be transported to the principal theatre of war.

372 Beaucaire, envoy in Copenhagen to Poincare 12.VI 1912. EMATSH 7 N 1544 373 "Bulletin annuel 1912". EMATSH 7 N 1539 181 The active corps from the Black Sea coast, the expeditionary force, were also given tasks on the Austrian front. The ghost of the expedition was kept up with second-rate units.34 The Russian army in Transcaspia consisted of two army corps, 44 infantry battalions in all. In addition there was a native army of 30 000 men in the Bukhara protectorate. The local peoples endured docilely the Russian domination, but they could not be left without surveillance by at least 20 000 men. Consequently there remained about 60 000 men free for active operations. The French observer learned that the Transcaspian army was still dreaming of an offensive towards the Afghan and Indian borders, animated by the old animosity against England. But the local schemes were of no consequence in the years 1912-1914, because the entente of 1907 had eliminated the possibility of a Russo-English conflict in Central Asia. Of the old dreams of Asian conquest only Persia still had some relevance. Since 1897 there had been a Russian-officered Cossack brigade in the Shah's country. It consisted of two regiments of four squadrons each, and one field battery and two horse batteries of four cannons eachs. The Russians had opposed the revolutionary movement in Persia which had since 1906 tried to replace the corrupt Shah by either modern democratic or ancient religious forms of government. The political process was too confused to be discussed here, but the Russians had succeeded in preventing any kind of order being established in northern Persia. The French major continues his report: "The Russo-Japanese war was seen by the Persians as certain proof of the weakness of their once powerful neighbour. To the estimation, mixed with fear, which Russia had inspired up to that time, had been added a feeling of contemptuous pity; the powerful barbarians turned out to be feeble and poor barbarians ... (The Persians) much preferred the English to the Russians who constantly hurt the polite people which the Persians are with their rude

374 "Emploi des troupes actives Russes en cas de guerre. Etude faite en Octo- bre—Novembre 1911". EMATSH 7 N 1538

182 manners. In addition, the Russians are poor while the English are rich".35 Another observer confirmed these impressions: "General Ljakov's (commander of the Cossack brigade) role in the bombardment of the Mejlis had provoked indignation in Tabriz, and the role of the Russian consul exasperates the people. Already abhorred by the Turks, the Russians are making themselves abhorred in Persia. Their situation in Caucasia is already very difficult because of the local opposition to them, and now they are creating new difficulties for themselves in Persia".376 Central Asia was destined to remain on the outer confines of the approaching European conflict. These reports are of interest mainly as an illustration of Asian currents of thought, which had relevance only to a more distant future. Earlier mentioned has been the Russian opinion that Finnish blood would be the first to be let. But (this same Guards general continued) the next blood to be let would be Austrian. One of the young captains commanded to Russia reported that the Habsburg monarchy was apparently the hereditary enemy, much more hated than Germany. Germany provoked antipathy and suspicion, but also admiration. France was regarded with an undeniable sympathy, and her financial support to Russia was one of the reasons for it. But a certain susceptibility also remained, since France had left Russia in the lurch in 1905. Little sympathy and little confidence was felt towards England, in spite of the recent entente. Political relations with Japan were good since the peace and subsequent treaties had been signed. But rancour remained because of defeat; no hate, but a desire to avenge the received affront. Romania enjoyed a little sympathy but not much confidence. The officers on the German frontier admired the clean, ordered towns behind the border, "so different from their own". But they also knew the German pride, Deutschland über alles,

375 "La Russie et la Gde Bretagne en Asie Centrale", by H. de Bouillaue de Lacoste, Chef de Bataillon d'infanterie. EMATSH 7 N 1544 376 "M. le Capitaine Augincem. 19.X 1980". EMATSH 7 N 1544 183 heartily detested the Prussians and hoped for a war to beat the Germans and to attack Berlin.378 Of course, the good captain had not conducted a modern opinion poll. He had received his impressions from the officers' mess and staff officers, and thus his report reflects only a part of Russian opinion. However, Austria and Germany were generally regarded as Russia's principal enemies.

7.6. Planning the Russian Troop Concentration in 1912

The Schlieffen Plan was naturally made and kept secret. Its main lines were, however, well known and caused among the French the desperate need to ensure Russian pressure in the east to ease the German superiority on the French frontier. It was known that the Germans had also studied the possibility of an attack eastwards in the beginning of the war. They calculated that they could start the offensive on the eighteenth day, and that by the thirty-fifth day they could have advanced to the line Kiev-Vilna. But the Russians were expected to retreat to the interior of their empire. German calculations showed that by the forty-fifth day no decision would have been reached, while in the meantime the French would be attacking in the west. Thus the mass of German troops would have to be transferred to the west. Bearing all this in mind the Germans came to the conclusion that they would have to abandon any plan of an initial offensive towards the east. The eastern border was to be fortified instead, and this would retard the Russian advance until the French army was crushed and the Germans then free to attack over the Vistula.38 This was the plan that the French and the Russians had to

378 "Rapport du Capitaine Lelong, detache å la Brigade des Chasseurs du Suvalki, 7/20.VI 1914". EMATSH 7 N 1486 "Mai 1914. Analyse d'un document relatant l'etude faite au 1912 par le grand etat-major allemand d'un projet d'operations contre les russes en cas de guerre sur les deux fronts". EMATSH 7 N 1538 184 render void by combining their efforts. In 1912 Russia disposed of 27 army corps in Europe and 28 reserve divisions, of which 20 were for field employment.379 Next year Joffre was told that there were 28 army corps available (the third Caucasian corps included) and 37 reserve divisions, of which 22 were free for field employment (the rest were necessary for keeping order in the interior and for garrisoning fortresses). The Russian infantry numbered 952 active battalions and 592 reserve battalions.380 The Baltic forces in the vicinity of capital consisted of two or three corps, about 128 battalions.381 Thus there were 43 infantry divisions and 18.5 cavalry divisions available against the Germans and 39 infantry divisions with 20 cavalry divisions against the Austrians.382 But that assignment of forces was going to vary according to the strength that the Germans directed against Russia. If they should come with more than 25 divisions, Russia was going to oppose them with 17 army corps, which left 9 corps against Austria.

The assignment Russian armies and army corps in the event of a strong German attack against Germany 816 battalions in the Vilna district IV army: XVIII, XVI, XXIV corps I army: XX, III, II, I, IV II army: VI, XV, XIX, XIII Warsaw district III army: XXIII corps V army: Grenadiers, V, XVII, XXV against Austria 504 battalions in southern Poland XIV corps Volynia X, IX, XI, XXI Podolia XII, VII, Cauc III (Variant: VIII) Bessarabia VIII (Variant: reserve divisions only)

If the German threat was weaker, more corps could be

379 "Note sur l'action militaire de la Russie en Europe. Aoüt 1912 — Mars 1913". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 380 "Note remise au Gal Joffre, Juillet 1913". EMATSH 7 N 1535 381 "Note sur les projets d'augmentation Russe, Juillet 1913" EMATSH 7 N 1535 382 "Action militaire de la Russie en cas de conflit europeen". EMATSH 7 N 1538 185 concentrated on the Austrian frontier and only thirteen corps left on the German frontier.

The assignment of Russian army corps in the event of weak German menace Austrian frontier 632 battalions in southern Poland XIV, XIX, XXIII, XVII, XXV corps Volynia XI, IX, X, XXI Podolia XII, VII, Cauc. III, perhaps VIII Bessarabia VIII or reserve divisions German frontier 688 battalions IV army XVIII, XVI, XXIV corps I army XX, III, II, I, IV II army VI, XV, XIII III army Grenadiers, V 383

The Baltic army consisted of the Guards and the twenty-second army corps. The actual details of the assignment of the corps between the armies and fronts varied in the successive troop concentration plans, but the plan of 1912 gives the general idea which remained constant. An even more urgent problem than the assignment of forces between the German and Austrian fronts was the speed with which these forces could be concentrated for action.

Forces available according to the plan of 1912 cavalry infantry cavalry infantry divisions divisions reserve reserve divisions divisions 8th day 12.5 13.5 12th 17.5 28.5 15th 18.5 38.5 20th 18.5 46.5 2 23rd 19.5 48.5 2 5.5 26th 19.5 51.5 8.5 13 36th 20.5 54.5 18 20 384

The table above gives the figures for the year 1912. Next year the troops were reckoned in corps.

383 "Composition detaillee des armees 1912". EMATSH 7 N 1538 384 = 383

186 Forces available according to the plan of 1913 I II 6th day VI, XIV, XV, XIX, XXIII, XI, XII, II, III 9 corps 8th IX (part), IX, XX, VIII 10th IX (rest) 12th X, XXI, VII, Grenadiers, XIII, I, XVIII 14th V, XVII, XXV 11 corps 16th XVI, XXIV, Cauc III 19th Sib I—V, Turkest I—II 20th 21 corps 23rd 23 corps in all not transported: Guards, XXII 385 386

There is a great different in the two tables from 1913. No essential improvement in the speed of mobilization and concentration was reported from 1912 to 1913. Therefore it seems that the dates in the left-hand column do not include the time (three to fifteen days) necessary for mobilization before the concentration transports could be started. This conclusion is supported by a report giving a third variation of the plan.

III 15th day: frontier zone corps mobilized, 8-9 corps facing Prussia 20th day: 11 corps facing Prussia, 9 corps facing Austria, 4 corps a Brest prepared to join either group 26th day: the greatest part of the reserve divisions detrained, only the most faraway active units remain in the rear 387

The gravest problem remained constant: "the relative slowness of the Russian troop concentration delays the moment when Russia will be able to take a resolute offensive." The slowness was due to the extent of the empire, and the inefficiency of the Russian railways.388 Five or six days were necessary for the mobilization of the railways, i.e. to transform them from civilian to military use;

385 "La mobilisation russe. Juillet 1913". EMATSH 7 N 1538 386 "Emploi des troupes actives Russes en cas de guerre. Etude faite en octobre- november 1911, fevrier 1913". EMATSH 7 N 1538 387 "Note sur l'action militaire de la Russie en Europe. Aoüt 1912 — Mars 1913". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 388 = 387

187 and even after that a quarter of their capacity had to be left for civilian transport needs. Thus a double line with a block system allowed 36 military trains a day (out of a total of 48), and a line without the block system allowed 18-30 trains a day, a single line 8-14 trains.389 There were eight lines from the interior to the frontier: 1. St. Petersburg-Riga-Kovno 1 track 14 trains 2. St. Petersburg-Warsaw 2 tracks 32 3. Bologoe-Sedlec-Warsaw 2 tracks 32 4. Moscow-Brest-Sedlec-Warsaw 2 tracks 32 5. Orel-Briansk-Gomel-Jabinka 1-2 6. Poltava-Kovel 1 7. Kursk-Kiev-Kovel 2 8. Odessa-Proskurov 2 390 (map 29) An army corps needed about 130 trains, and thus it occupied the line for several days. Because there were only the eight lines, one line had to carry several army corps. (graph 30). Unavoidably, this delayed their arrival at the frontier. The progress of troop concentrations can be seen in the attached sketch-maps (maps 31-34). In the first three maps (31-33) the number of the army corps and their strength in battalions is given on the various days of troop concentration. In the fourth map (34) the different armies and their strength in corps is given. The group of four corps at Brest is waiting for definite information of German strength before joining either the defence on the Prussian front or the attack towards Austria. The attack is to reach the line Przemysl-Lemberg and Thorn- Allenstein-Königsberg by the thirty-fifth day. During the first weeks a defensive attitude was to be adopted in Poland (the twenty-third and fifteenth corps can be seen retreating eastwards from map 31 to map 33) combined with a cautious advance against the corner of East Prussia and Galicia to prevent the enemy from cutting the Polish salient, "a

389 "La mobilisation russe. Juillet 1913". EMATSH 7 N 1538 39° "Note sur l'action militaire de la Russie en Europe. Aoilt 1912 — Mars 1913". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 "Note: Utilisation des chemins de fer Russes pour la concentration". EMATSH 7 N 1538

188 threat that dominates Russian planning, however improbable such an attempt seems to us (French)". The Russian general staff had promised to start action after the fifteenth day with the 8-9 corps then available against East Prussia, and on the twentieth day with 9 corps against Austria. The Warsaw concentration was too weak to allow the French any hope of Russian action on the western bank of the Vistula. After completing their troop concentration the Russians could start a more energetic offensive concentrically on the two fronts. The moment of starting this offensive was variously reported to be on the twenty-third, twenty-fifth, or thirtieth day.39' The Bulgarian military attaché, who knew the Russians well, supposed that the Russians would have their troop concentrations completed on the 17th day, but his English colleague did not believe him: "I don't think he has made sufficient allowance in his calculations for the stupidity and want of business capacity of the military and railway staffs, and for the fact that entrainment and detrainment are never practiced".392 There were five army corps in the Warsaw military district in peacetime, i.e. 80 000 rifles and 23 000 sabres. A surprise initial attack by these troops was looked at but found impossible. Only three divisions of infantry (out of ten) and three and a half cavalry divisions (out of seven and a half) were immediately available for operations, because the fortifications in Warsaw, Novogeorgevi6, Zegrze, Lom2a, Belostok, and Brest had to be manned, and also the Austrian border guarded. (With the reform of 1910 there were no longer any cadre formations of fortress troops, and thus the active troops had to garrison the fortifications until reserve troops arrived). A surprise attack with small troops on East Prussia was difficult because of the lakes and broken country. An attack in the direction of Berlin with all available troops would have led to an inevitable

391 "Action militaire de la Russie en cas de conflit europeen". EMATSH 7 N 1538 "Note au sujet du plan russe de 1912. 8.VII 1912". EMATSH 7 N 1538 392 "Colonel Sirmanov's scheme", by Lt. Col Alfred Knox 10.XII 1913. EMATSH 7 N 1536 189 disaster, because if the frontier were stripped of all guards, the Germans would be left free to attack from East Prussia Belostok and the Austrians to attack Brest from Przemysl, thus cutting Poland and its army off from the rest of Russia. Nor could the Russians think of leaving the Poles unguarded, because they were under the influence of Austrian propaganda. Leaving them alone would immediately provoke a revolt in Poland. Mobilizing the corps in Poland would also take its time, which made an immediate attack problematical. Or, if the corps were to be kept in constant wartime strength their number must be cut down, "which would diminish the value of the Alliance". Stationing them more eastward, in order to speed up their mobilization, would prolong the time necessary for the march to the frontier. It seems that this study was initiated by the French, and the questions were answered by the Russians, with a negative result at every point. The conclusion was that Russia was not able to think of a sudden attack against Germany without exposing herself to the danger of a disaster.'93

7.7. Efforts to Improve the Plan

This fact left matters as they were set out in the plans of the Russian general staff. This was not very satisfactory for the French. They remarked that the Russian armies facing Germany were not able to support each other because their frontier was of "immense length", 350 kilometres from Kovno via Grodno to Warsaw. "Under these conditions the conduct of united offensive operations will certainly be most difficult. It is even permissible to wonder whether a German army, even inferior in strength but well concentrated in good time, could succeed in breaking the long cordon of Russian armies with a vigorous attack". asa "Note au sujet des troupes russes de la circonscription de Varsovie 13.VI 1913". EMATSH 7 N 1538

190 Viewed from hindsight this apprehension seems prophetic. It is true that the French supposed that the attack would come from Thorn towards Warsaw, simultaneously with an Austrian attack from Przemysl on Brest. The French hoped that the Russians would concentrate their army more compactly in the region of Warsaw, from there to take the offensive against Allenstein, or against the left flank of the Austrians in the south, or towards Berlin, according to how the situation was shaping. "But whichever plan is adopted, it is the main interest to reduce the duration of the concentration which is much too long, because the Russian offensive cannot begin before the twentythird day." The problem had remained unchanged since the days of Boisdeffre: "The military value of the alliance lies, above all, in the possibility of a simultaneous attack from the east and from the west. But this ideal is far from being realized. The Russians are in fact much slower than the French armies." The solution lay always in improving the Russian railways: "Couldn't the Russian staff make an effort analogous to that of the French general staff, which has won an advantage of one or two days over the Germans, thanks to ameliorations in their railway network."'" The French general staff consequently made a programme of improvements for the Russian railway network (map 35): 1. lines I and V to be doubled, a gain of four days 2. line III to be quadrupled from Sedlec to Warsaw 3. line V to be quadrupled from Jabinka to Brest This was to allow the concentration of the mass of the Russian armies closer to Warsaw. With a view on an eventual offensive on the left bank, the lines from Warsaw to Thorn and Cracow were to be widened (from their European gauge of 1.44 m to the Russian gauge of 1.52 m). The Russians were also studying

394 "Note sur l'action militaire de la Russie en Europe. Aoüt 1912 — Mars 1913". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 191 on their own initiative the possibility of constructing some additional lines.395 At their meeting in July 1912 Joffre and 2ilinskii also discussed in some detail the development of Russian railways with a view to accelerating Russian troops concentration. 2ilinskii explained that the railways owned by the state were being improved in proportion to the availability of funds. The state had no direct influence on the private railways. The lines from Warsaw to Cracow and Thorn had been purchased by the state only to enable them to be transformed from the European gauge to the Russian one. He admitted that it might be preferable to move the centre of gravity of his troop concentration southwards to Warsaw—Ivangorod in order to operate from there towards Allenstein or Posen, according to where the Germans were to be found.396 At the request of the French minister of war397 Poincare took the notes of the French general staff with him on his visit to Russia in August 1912 and discussed them with Sazonov and the emperor. Sazonov promised his support for the French railway-demands in the council of ministers and with the emperor. Nicholas II found the question "interesting having discussed the question with M. Delcasse earlier". He promised not to lose the question from sight.398 The Dual Alliance, especially in its military aspect, appeared to be strengthened by the appointment of Delcasse to the embassy in St. Petersburg. "It cannot be said that his appointment has been greeted with satisfaction here" a French envoy reported from Germany,'" and in the entente camp "it is an event of first importance and has produced a most favourable impression. "400 Delcasse kept reminding the Russians of the railway programme and reported that "the Russians are working

395 "Ameliorations possible du reseau ferree de la Russie". (in "Note sur l'action ..." = 394) 396 Proces-verbal de l'entretien du 13 juillet 1912 ..." § 3 AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 397 War ministry to MAE 30.VII 1912. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 398 "Voyage de M. Poincare en Russie, Aoüt 1912. Entretien avec M. Sazonoff, ... Entretien avec l'Empereur". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 41 399 Envoy in Stuttgart to MAE 21.11 1913. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 42 499 Envoy in Belgrade to MAE 25.11 1913. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 42

192 12 diligently": they had even proposed the additional lines from Rjazan via Tula-Rovno-Bielsk to Warsaw. The emperor and the council of ministers approved the railway programme of the chiefs of staff in March 1913 and the additional lines in the summer of 1913. Delcasse acknowledged the good will of the Russians, but added that the French were always able to add their "useful word" in case of necessity, when authorizing the annual loan emissions on the Paris exchange.401 By the summer of 1913 General Joffre, too, was well satisfied with the progress of the Russian railway programme sketched at the previous meeting.4°3 Delcasse's reference to the eventual "useful word" relates to the principal reason for the defect of the Russian railway system — lack of money. France had supplied funds for financing Russia's economy since the days of Alexander III.400 Now a loan was arranged with special reference to the railway programme and to the strengthening of the Russian army. Russia was to obtain annually 400-500 million roubles to reactivate railway construction everywhere in the empire, on condition that the strategic railways mentioned in the protocol of 1912 were started immediately. Kokovtsov, being the minister of finance as well as prime minister, seemed to accept the condition "with pleasure" and was even gratified: he explained that there was no other source for the development of the Russian railways, which was of prime importance for the Russian economy then in full growth. The French financial agent reported that "there is something really fromidable preparing in Russia".4°4 Joffre and 2ilinskii met again in August 1913 and read through and approved the military convention and the various explanations and additions which had been made to it during

401 Delcasse to MAE 1.VIII 1913. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 42, DDF VIII/3 n:o 513 Delcasse to MAE 2.VIII 1913. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 42. DDF VIII/3 n:o 521 T02 Delcasse to MAE 12.VIII 1913. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 42 403 The financial history of the Dual Alliance cannot be dealt with here. There are several studies of it, e.g. B.V. Anan'ie, Rossija i mezdunarodnyi kapital 1897-1914. Leningrad 1970, or Raymond Poidevin, Finances et relations internationales 1887-1914. Paris 1970 404 "Note resumé å MAE" 7.VII 1913. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 42

13 — French information on .. . 193 the meetings of the general staff chiefs. The principle was confirmed that a simultaneous and immediate mobilization by the allies was to follow any act of war by Germany. The new German plan of 1913 reduced the time the Allies had for their mobilization and consequently allowed Germany more time to deal with France without a Russian threat from the east. At previous meetings Zilinskii had promised an offensive starting from the fifteenth day. Now he made a definite promise to this effect. The two generals were of a single mind that it was of prime necessity to reach a decisive success as soon as possible. A defeat of the French armies at the beginning would allow the Germans to transfer part of their armies to the east and defeat Russia in her turn. On the other hand a French success would facilitate the Russian operations, because then the transfer of the German armies to the east would be impossible. Therefore it was of importance, declared Joffre, for the French to have numerical superiority over the German forces in the west. This would be possible if the Germans were compelled to guard their eastern frontier with great force. It would be best of all if the Russian troops in the Warsaw military district would already constitute a threat to the Germans in peacetime. Zilinskii answered that a new army corps was being organized in Warsaw in the new Russian programme. Joffre again remarked that it was useless to leave a considerable part of the Russian forces against Sweden and Turkey; he "estimated that the defeat of Germany would facilitate the subsequent Russian operations against other enemy powers. The German defeat had to be pursued at the very beginning of the operations at any price". But in this respect Joffre could not make the Russians change their plans. Joffre then explained that the French troop concentrations would be completed on the tenth day, and that on the following day he was going to start the French offensive with nearly the whole of the French army, one hundred thousand men more than had been promised in the convention. Zilinskii answered that he would have 800 000 men concentrated on the German 194 border by the fifteenth day and would start their advance immediately after that day. The thrust was to be in the direction of the East Prussia or Posen and Berlin according to where the Germans were concentrated.405 Nicholas II gave his word to Joffre: "You can have an absolute confidence in me ... You can count on me and my army".406 Zilinskii came in for criticism later for his "rash" promise, when the promised offensive ended in disaster. But it can be seen from the preceding account that his promise was not rash; it was based on his plans for troop concentration and mobilization. On the fifteenth day at least 8-9 army corps were to be concentrated on the Prussian frontier (p. 187). The disastrous result in 1914 was due to utter incompetence in the execution of the plan; but even so the offensive was dangerous to the Germans and had its importance in the outcome of the battle of the Marne. The agreement of Joffre and Zilinskii simply made military sense, once the theory of an unavoidable war and of a single decisive battle at the very beginning of hostilities was accepted. Of course, neither Joffre's nor Zilinskii's plans were relevant to a long war of attrition, which no responsible military leader expected. The generals also reviewed the railway programme (map 36) and found that the line Orel—Warsaw had been double- tracked, Jabinka—Brest four-tracked. Instead of further improving the Sedlec—Bologoe line the Russians had planned a new line from Rjazan and Tula to Warsaw. New desiderata were then listed: 1. doubling the line Penza—Smolensk 2. doubling the line Poltava—Kiev—Kovel 3. doubling the line Rovno—Sarny—Luninec—Baranoviei The importance of having the Russian gauge on the lines to the west of the Vistula was again emphasized, as well as having crossings over the river. The generals also now stressed that it

405 "Proces-verbal des entretiens du mois Aoüt 1913 entre les chefs d'état- major des armees francaise et russe". AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 42. DDF VIII/ 3 n:o 79 406 Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE 21.VIII 1913. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 42

195 was vital to have more rolling stock, especially more powerful locomotives.407 The new lines were included in the preconditions of the loan which Russia was negotiating with French financial experts. Kokovtsov was a bit "surprised", i.e. reluctant, because earlier the generals had mentioned only some short lines, and now they demanded the construction in a few years of 5330 kilometres of new lines. An equal length of commercial lines was conceded or projected, in all about 11 000 kilometres absorbing about 2 500 000 000 francs during the following five or six years. But it was agreed that Russia was to receive 500 million francs annually from France, on condition that the strategic lines were to be built in four years. The discussions took the rest of the year (1913), while the Russians tried to avoid too definite promises and Kokovtsov also tried to substitute more economically useful lines for some of the military line, but these details are not very relevant here.408 Captain Wehrlin calculated that this programme was going to give Russia seven lines to the frontier between Kovel and Belostok, of which four lines would continue over the Vistula; and three or four continuous lines from the Volga and Caucasia to the western frontier.409 Some of the commercial lines were also useful from the military point of view.

7.8. The Grand Programme for Increasing the Russian Army

Another desideratum of the French was an increase in the strength of the Russian army. There was no quarrel with the Russian general staff in this respect. The Russian government

407 = 405 408 Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE 27.IX 1913, 28.X 1913, 31.XII 1913, 11.I 1914. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 42 409 Wehrlin to war minister 20.XII 1913/2.I 1914. EMATSH 7 N 1540, AMAE C.P. Russie N.S. 42

196 and the Duma were also well disposed towards the demands of defence, even if Kokovtsov quarrelled with Suhomlinov about the haphazard use of the appropriations. A grand programme was compiled for increasing the army in the years 1913-1917. The Duma adopted a programme for increasing the annual number of conscripts from 450 000 (1913) to 585 000 in 1917. This would raise the effectives of the peace-time army from 1 280 000 to 1 700 000 in 1917.410 The increase in numbers implied new formations, too. The number of army corps was to increased from 27 to 33 (in Europe). The first in order was the twenty-sixth corps in Warsaw, for which horses, guns, and material was already being collected by the time of Joffre's visit in August 1913.411 The twenty-seventh for Kiev was due sometime in 1915 or 1916. Twenty-six new cavalry regiments were planned — 2 in 1914, 6 in 1915, 9 in 1916 and 9 in 1917.412 The artillery of each corps was to be reorganized. Instead of twelve batteries of eight cannons each there were to be eighteen six-gun batteries. The result would be an increase from 96 to 108 cannons for each corps. Heavy artillery was to be increased, too. New detachments were to be established to man the Polish fortresses. Turkestan was to receive six new battalions, and Vladivostok a new division of 16 battalions.413 The outbreak of war in August 1914 prevented Russia from realizing this vast programme. Of course, one of the reasons for the fact that Germany was not absolutely resolute in defending peace during the July crisis was the knowledge that Russia would be sure to gain this additional strength in the future, and that it was in 1914 if ever that Germany had a chance of winning a war on two fronts. Of the great programme only one army corps in Warsaw and one rifle brigade for the twenty-second corps in Finland was

410 "Augmentation de l'effectif de l'armee russe". Ambassador in St. Petersburg to MAE 6.VI 1914. EMATSH 7 N 1480 411 Delcasse to MAE 12.VIII 1913. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 42 412 "Note sur les projets de renforcement de l'Armee Russe". Laguiche to war minister 24.III 1914. EMATSH 7 N 1478 413 "Note sur les projets d'augmentation de l'Arme e Russe, Juillet 1913". EMATSH 7 N 1535 "Note sur les projets d'augmentation de l'armee russe, 24.11I 1914". EMATSH 7 N 1535 197

established by the time war broke out.414 The Guards and the first and/or the eighteenth corps had been earmarked for guarding the capital and the Baltic coast during the first days of the war. The new brigade in Finland freed one division in the St. Petersburg district, and consequently it was possible to transport one of the army corps from there to the frontier.415 This information of the French military attaché's was not entirely free from contradiction: the Guards corps was not seen among the corps marching to the front (maps 31-33), but both the first and the eighteenth were there. Perhaps the earlier information was still valid: these corps were to march to the front, but only after it was seen that the menace of a German or a Swedish landing was not materializing. In fact also the twenty-second corps was transferred to the western front when the Finns did not revolt and Sweden did not attempt a landing in Finland in August 1914. A new plan of troop concentration was being prepared for the autumn of 1914, but the war broke out before it came into operation. Thus the Russian army began fighting with the strength and according to the plans which the French knew from the years 1912 and 1913.416

The strength of the Russian army in Europe on the eve of the great war infantry 55 divisions 9 brigades 952 battalions reserve 37 divisions 592 battalions cavalry 20 divisions 4 brigades 3 regiments 560 squadrons reserve 15 divisions 524 squadrons or sotnias artillery 361 field batteries 56 mortar batteries 42 horse batteries 10 heavy batteries reserve 198 field batteries 36 mortar batteries 17 horse batteries

414 Zalon6kovskil, Plany vofny p. 93 415 "Creation de la 4eme Bde de tirailleurs de Finlande". Laguiche to war minister 26.IV/9.V 1915. EMATSH 7 N 1478 "Modification dans la reparti- tion des troupes". Laguiche to war minister 23.V/5.VI 1913. EMATSH 7 N 1478

198 These troops were organized in the Guards corps, the Grenadier corps, and the twenty-five army corps plus one corps forming in Warsaw. In addition there were three corps in Caucasia, two corps in Turkestan, and five corps in Siberia. As always, each army corps consisted of two infantry divisions, one or two calvary divisions, two artillery brigades and one mortar group, one sapper battalion, and some of the corps one rifle brigade. The twenty-second corps in Finland consisted of four rifle brigades.41 Numerically and materially the army was tolerably prepared for the first battle, equal to the Austrian army and not totally hopeless in comparison with the Germans. No thought had been given to the possibility of a long war. The offensive to East Prussia was partly improvised because Suhomlinov had razed magazines and fortifications in Poland in preparation for his plan of 1910, which was subsequently annulled.418 Some slight personal defects in the higher echelons of the army were noticed, e.g. "Suhomlinov does not think about anything else but the skirts of his wife"419 or "Januskevie has been appointed chief of staff, which makes a bad impression because he has little experience of commanding troops".42° Kokovtsov was replaced by the ancient Goremykin by the end of January 1914, and there were rumours of Sazonov's dismissal.421 With the wisdom of hindsight it is possible to understand that these were symptoms of grave defects, of the disease that defeated the Russian army and killed the Russian empire after a few years of battle. But the further story lies outside the framework of this exposition. However, it may be added for comparison that at the moment of Russia's maximum effort in 1917 she had mobilized 15 or 16 million men. After the casualties — a couple of million killed, more than one million crippled, an unknown number of wounded, a couple of million prisoners of war, a number of deserters; and a few million men in depots and supply service

415 Zaionekovskii. Plany voiny p. 320 417 "Notice complete sur l'armee Russe" s.d. EMATSH 7 N 1536 418 Zaionekovskii, Plany voiny p. 300 419 Laguiche to General Dupont 22.VI/5.VII 1913. EMATSH 7 N 1478 420 Laguiche to General Dupont 29.III/11.IV 1914. EMATSH 7 N 1478 421 Laguiche to General Dupont 30.I/12.II 1914. EMATSH 7 N 1478 199 — enough combatants remained to form 202 infantry divisions and 50 calvary divisions, united in twelve armies.422

422 "Renseignements demandes pour l'etablissement d'un tableau comparatif de l'effort de mobilisation et des pertes des grandes puissances belligerants 28.I 1919". EMATSH 7 N 1538

200 8. Conclusion

The French military attachés were able to acquire much information on the Russian army. The picture drawn on the basis of their material is complete enough in military and political questions, even though they were unable to perceive social and economic aspects. The widest and most detailed view was given by Moulin. Then, during Matton's time, the Russian wish to hid their intention of ignoring the French alliance obscured the picture. With the revival of the alliance the quality of information also improved. The French aim in the military alliance remained constant. Germany was to be compelled to fight simultaneously on two fronts to save France from defeat by superior German forces, and eventually to render possible the reconquest of her lost provinces and the retrieval of her leading political role in Europe. England was taken into account as a potential enemy in 1898 but disappeared from that role in 1904. In the beginning the Russian general staff hoped that the Dual Alliance would relieve them of the German menace and leave them free for the fight with Austria, the principal rival in the Oriental question. But they never dared to leave the German frontier without strong defences, and little by little Germany took over the role of principal enemy. This was perhaps partially due to French insistence, but mainly to the incessant growth of German might and ambition. A reversal of alliances seemed possible by the turn of the century because of the Russian adventure in the Far East and the possibility of the dissolution of the Habsburg empire. Later Suhomlinov planned to replace troop concentrations in Poland with a defensive 201 position in White Russia. But already in 1909 Germany was seen to be supporting Austrian schemes in the Balkans, and by 1914 Germany's own plans in Turkey and Constantinople were definitely revealed. Delcasse said to Nicholas II that the road via Vienna to Constantinople was, appearances not- withstanding, not a straight one. "Yes, I know" the emperor said, "it goes through Berlin".423 Germany was not to be allowed to fight and conquer each in turn France and Russia. By 1913 the French and Russian general staffs had agreed on the principle of a simultaneous attack from the west and from the east against Germany. To make possible the realization of this plan France financed Russian armaments and railway programmes, and the French generals were never reticent in expressing their wishes. But the Russian army was not dominated by French generals. Military logic led the French and the Russian generals to uniform conclusions once the premise of the one decisive battle in the beginning of the expected war was adopted. Sometimes the generals schemed together against the Russian civilian government, especially the minister of finance. Of course, the opposition of the minister of finance was not due to any arbitrary obstructionism. It reflected the fact of Russian underdevelopment, the fact that Russia was not financially or materially able to arm all her potential manpower or to construct communications comparable to those of western Europe. From the reports of the French military attaché a picture emerges of an unrelenting endeavour to develop the Russian armed forces. But the historian has the advantage of seeing also the formidable structural impediments to this. He can observe and put together the innumerable comments on the waste of the soldiers' time, the officers' lack of energy and interest, of the incompetence of the decrepit generals, of the lack of system and order, of the corruption of the administration. These "expressions of the Slav soul" can be taken as symptoms of the rottenness of the social and political system of the Old Russia. The system nearly collapsed in 1905. For years the armed

423 Delcasse to M AE 29.I 1914. AMAE, C.P. Russie N.S. 42

202 forces were occupied in restoring order, neglecting their professional tasks. Revolutionary agitation was reported in some army and naval units, too, even afterwards. These facts were, however, soon forgotten or ignored. The inability to see defects in itself and to reform itself must have been one of the mortal defects of the Tsarist system. Another structural problem in the Russian empire was the national question. In the era of nationalism there emerged two contradictory currents. The Russians attempted to build a unified national state — the apparent strength of such a system was demonstrated in the bitterly admired neighbour Germany. But simultaneously the various peoples of the empire were infected by a national consciousness of their own; only the backward tribes of inner and eastern Russia continued to be assimilated. The Poles, a historical nation, had not been satisfied with a mere autonomy; twice, in 1830 and 1863, they had violently shown their feelings. The subsequent policy of incompetent integration had made them completely irreconcilable. A policy of brutal segregation hade made the Jewish population equally irreconcilable. In the Baltic provinces the barons, Russia's most conscientious administrators, were suspected of German sympathies. Their self-government was whittled down with the support of the local Letts and Estonians. But these peoples then started developing their own instead of a Russian nationality. In Finland there had been a Swedo-Finnish quarrel, but it subsided and was replaced by opposition to the Russian policy of uniting the Grand Duchy to the central parts of the empire. In Caucasia the various small tribes were hardly pacified, and the Armenians did not know whether the Russians or the Turks ought to be hated more. The Muslim population in Caucasia as well as in Turkmenistan could be suspected of anticolonial pan- Islamic feelings. Thus Finns and some Caucasians had to be relieved of all military service. Polish and Jewish recruits caused problems in planning the mobilization. Several army corps had to be kept out of the initial principal battle to watch the potential rebels. The result of all Russian efforts to unite these peoples by force was the separation of the border regions in 1917 when there was no more force left. The Bolsheviks had quite a task to reconquer the empire. Of course, allowing local nationalism 203 free rein might have resulted in separatism, too. The Russian commanders and the general staff were not satisfied simply to serve in their country's defence; they sketched far-reaching programmes of conquest. Their imperialist dreams reached out towards Galicia and the Turkish Straits and further on over all the Balkans and to a naval position on the Mediterranean. In Persia they tried to build a dominating position and to reach the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean. The pressure on the Indian and Afghan borders seems to have been mainly a means of blackmailing England to concessions in the Near East, but some ideas of conquest were cherished among the army chiefs in Transcaspia. The Far East schemes were fostered mainly by the court and naval circles, but were not totally alien to the general staff, either. The plan of a landing on the Bosphorus, accepted by all in the 1880's, was still there in the naval plans of 1912 but had disappeared from the army planning. The core of the expeditionary force was re-allocated to tasks on the main battle front, and only the Caucasian district continued preparations for a battle with the Turks. These plans were reflections of dreams that existed even outside the military, among the "patriotic" circles of the civil population. The generals were not able to make their plans part of Russia's official foreign policy; neither the government nor the foreign office were tools of the military or the chauvinists. The professional diplomatists were able to perceive that all attempts to realize such dreams would be rendered suicidal by the reactions of other powers. But the suicide was often very close, even before the catastrophe of 1914. The attitude of the military towards the neighbouring countries was not always in line with the current reality. They regarded Japan as a dangerous enemy, or they took Italy's membership in the Triple Alliance at face value long after the diplomatic ententes had removed all danger of a Japanese attack or any chance of an Italian corps fighting against Russia or France. The generals had a tendency to regard nations as either enemies or friends, without nuances. The admirals did not understand that a naval demonstration on the Swedish coast could make an enemy out of a pro-German neutral; it is well known that Admiral v. Essen was at the last moment prevented from provoking the Swedes in this way in August 1914. 204 The war plans were made for the eventuality of a war against Austria and Germany. Fortifications were constructed, railways were built, manoeuvres held according to these plans. All this must have had some importance in the development of the general attitude towards these neighbours, working against any real attempt to reach an entente with them. And the neighbouring states knew of the Franco-Russian preparations and of the military-patriotic schemes of conquest. They would not have been able to trust any proposal for an entente if one had been made. A war was thought to unavoidable, and preparations for it made it inevitable. The theory built around the idea of a decisive battle to be fought and won at the first moment of the war gave enormous signifance to speed in mobilization. The obsession with the n-th day emerges constantly from the preceding account. It explains the impatience with which the military watched the attempt at conciliation during the July crisis of 1914S27 and why they wrenched the decision from the diplomatists. In this aspect there is a complete symmetry between the Franco-Russian and the Austro-German camps. It is not possible to judge one or the other party guilty or not guilty of the war, whatever the sequence of their decisions or despatches might be. The European political and military culture was guilty of the great war. Appointing individual guilt is, of course, a political or propagandist question, not a historical problem. If we were concerned with the Kriegsschuldfrage, we could make much of the aggressive plans of the Russian general staff or of Matton's or Moulin's letters. Perhaps it is significant that the editors of the French collection of diplomatic documents have not published Matton's letters, for instance. But even so no sensible historian could regard the French or the Russians of being innocent of involvement in the lead-up to the great war, any more than other nations. These officers would have felt hurt if they had been accused of a lack of warlike disposition. In the nineteenth century war was a romantic test of manly virtue, for

424 L.C.F. Turner, The Russian Mobilisation in 1914, in The War Plans of the Great Powers, 1880-1914, ed. by M. Kennedy. London 1979. p. 252-266, discusses the last phase of the Russian military planning in detail. 205 seriously-thinking people; only some of the idealistically- minded saw it as an abominable crime against humanity. It was legitimate to defend national honour, power, influence, interest. If the devious schemes of the enemy made a war inevitable, it was one's right and duty even to start that war if conditions proved favourable for victory, conquest, weakening the enemy, or other positive result. Nobody prepared for a world war. The preparations were for a short war, for the one battle, which would disentagle the problems that had worried the diplomats for decades. It is another story how this cheerful dash turned into the nightmare of 1914-1918 and/or 1914-1945.

206

FINLAND

St. PETERSBURG

Riga nl `• / • _ /" XIII VILNA ~•'~ MOSCOW 0 t MOSS O • Nizni • r . Smolensk ' ~ k ' o Minsk ^p vl XV 1 ~ XVI ~ WARSAW 0 Brest y ~ O t ~ ~ V ` xlv XIII ' - -- KAZAN KIEV • ` i'-~ \ 0 • Ix Harkov t, ' % 0 ~ ~ i x i I

XII _ - ;Don Cossacks

VIII ODESSA

Sevastopol

CAUCASUS

Map 1. Military districts and peacetime deployment of army corps, 1889-1892 (Mission en Russie du Cm. Matton, "Memoire sur la Rus- sie" 29. XII 1892. EMATSH 7 N 1484)

207 Map 2. Planned troop concentrations, 1882 ("Historique de la concentration russe de 1882 a 1902, Croquis I, Concentration russe 1882". EMATSH 7 N 1509)

208 13 Map 3. Planned troop concentrations, 1884 ("Historique de la concentration russe de 1882 å 1902, Croquis II, Schema de la concentration russe 1884". EMATSH 7 N 1509")

14 — French information on ... 209 Riga Libau

Dunaburg

Kovno

O Vilna

Minsk Grodno O

0 Novogeorgievsk~ Belostok • Warsaw XIII v O Brest 0 \ GUARDS Breslau IvangorQd CAY O xv Revel ix

0 Rovno au

VII

VIII xv = fifteenth army corps CAV = cavalry division(s)

Map 4. Planned troop concentrations, 1880, according to Zaion- ekovskii (Zaion&kovskii, Plany voiny, Karta n:o 3)

210 St. Petersburg

Warsaw v l _ Kovno XI

— = railway under construction

Map 5. Strategic railways in the eighties and the army corps to be transported to the west ("Historique de la concentration russe de 1882 å 1902", EMATSH 7 N 1509; and several reports by the French military attaché, EMATSH 7 N 1471-1472)

211 Libau Riga

Kovno 0 n 0 Vilna GERMANY Allenstein 0 Grodno Minsk b 0 IV

VI O Belostok Posen xvt ovogeorglevsk 0 v xV xvlll N"----"Cl\ GUARDS

Warsaw 0 Brest Ivangorod Breslau v XVII 0 XIV xm 0 Kovel x xi XII Rovno O m vu O Cracow Prze,mysl 0 Lemberg i„ ix vni x v vl x`a m XII MI IX AUSTRIA f 0 v, Proskurov

Map 6. Russian and supposed enemy troop concentrations, 1892 ("Carte remise au Gal du Boisdeffre le 11. avril 1892". Moulin to war minister 7.VI 1892. EMATSH 7 N 1508)

212 0

THE NIEMEN 0 ARMY

IV XVI Grodno BELOSTOK GROUP GUARDS VI GENERAL XV I RESERVE V xvw Warsaw Brest 0

TIIE VISTULA ARMY (

THE BUG GROUP xi:f Rovno 0 x

XI XVII

Vn I THE ARMY OF VOLYNIA

XII VIII

Map 7. Planned troop concentrations, 1890, according to Zaion- ekovskii. (Zaion6kovskii, Plany voiny, Karta n:o 6)

213 Map 8. Peacetime deployment of army corps by the turn of the century (Several reports by the French military attaché, EMATSH 7 N 1474-1476)

214 Map 9. Planned troop concentrations, 1896 (Moulin to war minister 14.II 1896. EMATSH 7 N 1474)

215 5 GLRAIä.`: CORPS Grodno 0 ßelostolc

2 AUSTRIAN CORP() 5 AUSTRIAN CORPS 7 AUSTRIAN CORPS

VIII

Map 10. Planned troop concentrations, 1897 ("Historique de la concentration russe de 1882 a 1902. Croquis VIII: Cencentration russe Janvier 1897". EMATSH 7 N 1509)

216 Nikolaev 2nd ECHELON Herson Odessa 1st ECIIELON

} 2nd ECHELON T \ ~a Sevastopol 1st ECHELON RUMANIA

()Varna BULGARIA Burgas

TURKEY Constantinop 1 e

❑ infantry m cavalry v artillery n engineers

regiment 6 battalion a company

Map 11. Troops assembled for intervention in Turkey, 1897 (Moulin to war minister 1.II 1897. EMATSH 7 N 1474)

217

~ Orenburg

RUSSIA • . • ~ J\ THE ARAL C SE,A ~~. ✓ ‘.9

Krasnovodsk p~a% Taskent ~A,P. B uhara Samarkand .188 3 Z 8 l8 _. / TshardshOU ,"-‘• ,-‘ ge:rv ~ ._.~ ''''\~~/ ~_ - ‘ Kerki ~ '/"/ Kushka 642 S~1c" .9'9 / \, PERSIA Herat ~ Gt /•) i KObul i' 1 o_ — • Kandahar / I

Bander Abbas \ INDIA .e6p • l

c~f

Map 12. Russia's Central Asian position

218 Vyborg

0 Kronstadt

Dünamünde

x Kovno ~Ossovec a Novo-Georgievsk ~ ~ xx . 7.egrze Warsaw p X Brest Ivangorod x 1st Class o 2nd a 3rd 0 no Class

Bendery 0 OvCakov

0 Ahalcvh

Map 13. Principal fortresses in European Russia ("Note sur 1'armee russe II". EMATSH 7 N 1506)

219 Map 14. Planned troop concentrations, 1900 ("Historique de la concentration russe de 1882 å 1902. Croquis IX: Concentration russe en 1900". EMATSH 7 N 1509)

220 Res 6. ARMY AV I Res II XX 1. ARMY !V xvlil / a~ Res ReS O

x vi

2. ARMY ,C`(\‘`" Rcs GENERAL RESEVE O~

xm x i xS(3UTtI xvm FR ON 3. ARMY x xi vu • CM \ Res x 4. ARMY

XI \ CAUC

vin 5. ARMY V = fifth army corm CAV = cavalry division(s) RES = reserve division(s)

Map 15. Troop concentrations, 1900, according to Zaion6kovskii. (Zaionekovskii, Plany voiny, Karta n:o 7. Unidentified divisions are indicated "RES", but some of them may be active divisions)

221 XX 2 Res

XVI The Niemen Army

IV 7 Res

The Narev Army

The Bug Army

The South- Western Army XIII XXI x 7 Res Ix

XII

6 Res = six reserve divisions VIII 5 Res in Bessarabia VII 1 Res

in the Crimea

Map 16. Planned troop concentrations, 1902. ("Concentration russe en 1902". EMATSH 7 N 1537)

222 = sinele-tracked railway = double-tracked railway = European gauge

Map 17. Sedlec-Bologoe railway

223 Map 18. "Map drawn by Pendezec", 1903. ("Rapport du General Pendezec, Aoüt 1903". AMAE C.P. Russie N.S. 36) 224 14 RUSSIA

I ~.. MONGOLIA •--. G ~ I - ,.i ' 1 ~.. \

CHINA 1 Vladivostok

. . ) ~2 \Iukden ./ Laojanr

Port \thur

KOREA ~Q- r JAPAN

-- - = the line of demarcation between the Russian and Japanese zone of interest in 1907 and 1910

- the Siberian railway continued to Vladivostok and Port Arthur

= Japanese offensive in 1904-05

Map 19. The theatre of war in the Far East

15 — French information on ... 225 FINLAND

I\\ xx Guards Reval ~ St. Petersbure

l~ga l~ v• rlov~orcd Jaroslav Pskov `^ / N, ~ r\ \\ Gren Ufa •„ ••n • Moscow Novc;orod % xvn .C~ • N~ ~ TG Tambov Samara Brlansk 4 • • • Voronez Sat tov

IIar kov

Ekaterinoslav

Stavs pol • Vladikav-Ak ~ i~ 1.--, i n Cauc \ ?! ) Tiflis K rs

= sixth army corps • = reserve brigade

Map 20. The garrison areas of the Russian army before the reform of 1910 ("L'armee russe." Conference developpee par M.le Lieutenant Schlattery. Association des officiers subalter- nes de 1'Ecole d'Instruction d'Infanterie de 1'Ecole Milit- aire, Paris, Annee 1911-1912")

226 the Baltic Army 150.000 men 18th day

O Kovno the Vilna Öilna V Army 350.000 men/ 18th day O Grodno O Belostolc

the Warsaw Army 450.000 men O Brest 16th day the Kiev Kove1 O Army \ 450.000 men 18th day I 0 Rovno

(6) Proskurov

Map 21. Planned troop concentrations, 1909, according to infor- mation given to the French military attaché ("Concentration russe, 1909". Matton to war minister, September 1910. EMATSH 7 N 1537)

227 corps • 0. N battalions' ~ .(1 ~ ros i Grodno / \ /11 ~~ Oa~alions 96 battalions F3elesto;< ; /_G \ ~\ N ovoaPorgievsk \ Warsaw' Brest \ \ 172 b O battalions \ 211 \\bt \ IiQns Ivangorod ~~

9 AUstria n cor~ ~

Map 22. Planned troop concentrations, 1908, according to Zaion- &kovskii (Zaionakovskii, Plany voiny, Karta n:o 10)

228 Dvinsk

Kovno O I o ,6th Ist Army Army EAST PRUSSIA E Minsk 0 1st ~ 2nd O 1-- —I Grodno Army LRES] I Armyl I RES --1 — — 3 rd I 2nd Army I Army 0 Brest I I 3 rd Army

I 4th Army ❑ 0 Kiev Rovno O RES GALICIA Proskurov

0 proposed deployment of armies i—i ~...~ alternative deployment

Map 23. Proposed troop concentrations, 1903, according to Zaionckovskii (Zaionckovskii, Plany voiny, Karta n:o 9)

229 FIN LA N D

Guards r t t + )i? 1 xx» • Vologda t, Vjatka X x Ekaterinburg Libau Novgorod Pskov ~ XXIV +- Gren Nizni-N. Dvinsk xxvt x Kazan Smolensk Moscow • vnuj x Tula xvi Samara` x x• Warsaw' Orenburg Orel xiv xix • 1 iNovnn oronez I xxt Kursk Sarato Kiev Harkov

Ekaterinodar

Sevastopol

Cauca Tiflisxx I Cauc/ I Cauc ' (, E ri van

~X X Xiq~ = new army corps = army corps removed from western to eastern Russia

Map 24. The garrison areas of the Russian army after the reform of 1910 ("L'armee russe. Conference developpee par M. le Lieutenant Schlattery. Association des officiers subalter- nes de l'Ecole d'Instruction d'Infanterie de l'Ecole Milit- aire. Paris, annee 1911-1912")

230 1 st Army

_ GrodnoU \4th Army Belostol, 2 nci r"-•5th Army Army '. Baranovi6i Brest

Kovno rd CArmy

7th Army • Benderv

Map 25. Planned troop concentrations, 1910, according to Zaion- ekovskii (Zaionekovskii, Plany voiny, Karta n:o 12)

231 7--; Vilna 19th day 3880.000 men Grodno 0 Relostok 450.Q00 Warsaw 16th day O Brest

Kovel 0 4501000 men 18th day Rovno

Map 26. Planned troop concentrations, 1910, according to the information given to the French military attaché ("Pieces pretes 1910". EMATSH 7 N 1537)

232 Kovno O 180.000 men

200.000 men i Grod=o Thorn 160.000 men O / Belostok

Warsaw

150.000 men / Kove1 1 Holm 0 ( O l 120.000 120.000 men 0 Rovno)

20th day 120.000 men o Proskurov

Map 27. Planned troop concentrations on the 23rd day after mobilization and the proposed action, according to Col- onel Janin (Croquis joint å l'etude du LtColonel Janin "Au sujet de la valeur de la cooperation russe". EMATSH 7 N 1537) 233

FINLAND ALAND Kymi- x joki Vyborg Helsinki

1 x Ino x :' UY x Kronstadt Nargen `;\ , `O 0 % *. x `-`;~ Kras- St. Petersburg Tallinn - 'x nye, Gorki Narva Moonsound ESTONIA '

__- = line of defence x = principal observation post /COURLAND Dunamunde 0 Riga Libau

Map 28. Planned defence of the approaches to St. Petersburg ("Golfe de Finlande". Rapport annuel 8.I 1910. SHM BB 7 n:o 120 r)

234 St. Petersburg

Br,jaflsk

Brest Orel Gomel

Map 29. The eight railway lines available for the concentration of the Russian army ("Carte de Chemins de fer russes en 1913. Circonscrip- tions Militaires". EMATSH 7 N 1537) 235 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 rh day / . /, /i// / /// ,~ / / % i „///,,/ 9

10 / xx ~ iv; i i / // PART / // / ( 11 i /////////.: ~/ ' ~ ~/~ ix / vw ,,,,4,;1',,,,,,,,,,,, „ i ; z ,/ i• / ' / i / / / / i 4 13 molt l ',/i.~, ~ i / '1,n„i 14 ; / % ./n„ : ~ ~ .... ^f ~ l ,. /,// , .. ~ „/// ~ ' ,. ~ lir, / ~ / / / / / / 7;0 16 x ni ' % ; ~ / i ; xxi i % VII / AND / / // i %// ~ 4~ / 17 / XVIII / // (7RENA- , i ', / i i / i / I/ DIERS j / 1;7 i / / 4 / i / ' i / / / ;/,/,// / ; ; N//„„11 %~,,.o/ % 19 i l // , ,/ 1.,(/ ,/.1 , V/ ~ ...i x i 20 / i i 4 / % / i ~ / i / : / /,,,//./,,,,, ; xxv • %,r./„ , 22 / i V > ~ n ' / / j l DON j / / COSS- 1/,r,/„///r,,///, i / ACI:S ,,, CACC w i /.,.• / - i , / X I O j AND n IV i / / / j / / / // / /. / /, / 1

//„ 11,„l 3,3

Graph 30. Graph of the utilization of the railway lines by the army corps arriving from the interior of the empire ("Emploi des troupes actives Russes en cas de guerre. Etude fait en Octobre-Novembre 1911, Fevrier 1913". EMATSH 7 N 1538) 236 XX l ö~

e 32 sk 16 Smolen

, 16 xiii ~xxm . Warsaw s C`, 16 )(ix 16

XVII

Orel

VIII 24

XX = twentieth army corns 16 = sixteen battalions

Map 31. The progress of the Russian troop concentrations I: the eighth day. ("Frontiere Occidentale de la Russie, 8eme jour". EMATSH 7 N 1538)

237

rxx 18 (III (, 40 r xxv u ~ rx771~ nl f v ~ 8 [16 %vnx XXIII [Gren L [.9g 8 XIV

Map 32. The progress of the Russian troop concentrations II: the fifteenth-eighteenth day. First contact with the enemy on the fifteenth day. ("Frontiere Occidentale de la Russie, 15me jour, 18me jour". EMATSH 7 N 1538)

238 16 r = sixteen reserve battalions

Map 33. The progress of the Russian troop concentrations III: the twentieth day ("Frontiere Occidentale de la Russia, 20me jour". EMATSH 7 N 1538)

239 29-31th day rc 3 re 25-35ch day C 25th day 27th day

( 2 rc 22-30th day

( 1 rc 28th day [lb 25-35th day rc

1 A C = 1 army corps 3 rc = 3 reserve corps

Map 34. The progress of the Russian troop concentrations IV: the twenty-third day, offensive begins. ("Croquis schematique de la Concentration Russe le 23e jour. Etude du 2e Bureau de 1'Etat Major de l'armee. Aoüt 1912". EMATSH 7 N 1535) 240 15 Map 35. Railway improvements demanded by the chiefs of staff in 1912 ("Developpement des lignes demandees. Decembre 1913". Wehrlin to war minister 20.XII 1913/2.I 1914. EMATSH 7 N 1540)

16 — French information on .. . 241 St Petersburglr

I Riga •, / p ,o Bologoe

Kovno ~ ~ o— ~~ ~w Moscow o i _o

Warsaw ~ Baranovici Smolensk Rjazan Tula Sedlec ~ Luninec v --e Orel Kovel Penza Rovno Kiev — —' Kursk

VII

Poltava

= lines to be improved or constructed

Map 36. Railway programme discussed by Joffre and 2ilinskii in August 1913 (Developpement des lignes demandees. Decembre 1913". Wehrlin to war minister 20.XII 1913/2.I 1914. EMATSH 7 N 1540)

242 Sources

Etat-Major de l'Armee de Terre, Service Historique, Chateau de Vincennes 7 N 1471 — 7 N 1544 Attachés militaires, Russie, 1887-1919 Service Historique de la Marine, Chateau de Vincennes BB 7 n:o 67, 75, 120-122 Attachés navales, Russie, 1904-1913 Archives, Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres, Quai d'Orsay, Paris Correspondence Politique, Russie, Nouvelle Serie 12-13, 16- 18, 30-42

Published Documents

Documents diplomatiques francais 1. ser. 1871-1900, I—XVI, Paris 1929-1959 2. ser. 1901-1911, I—XIV, Paris 1930-1955 3. ser. 1911-1914, I—XI, Paris 1929-1960

Works Cited

Charles E. Adams, Der Wiederaufstieg der russischen Kriegs- marine in den Jahren 1905-1914. Marine Rundschau 1/1964 B.V. Anan'ic, Rossija i medunarodnyi kapital 1897-1914. Leningrad 1970 Christopher Andrew, Theophile Delcasse and the Making of the Entente Cordiale. A Reappraisal of French Foreign Policy 1898-1905. New York 1968 243 L.G. Beskrovnyi, Russkaja armija i flot v XIX veke. Voenno- ekonomieskaja potencial Rossii. Moskva 1973 I.S. Blioh (Jean de Bloch, Johann von Bloch), Buduscaja voina v tehnieeskom, ekonomieeskom i diplomatieeskom otnoenijah I—VI, S. Peterburg 1898 Jean de Bloch, La Guerre. Traduction de l'ouvrage russe La Guerre Future aux points de vue Technique, Economique et Politique, I—VI. Paris 1898 Jean de Bloch, Evolution de la guerre et de la paix. Extrait de l'ouvrage en 6 volumes ayant pour titre La Guerre Aux points de vue technique, economique et politique. Paris 1899 — Der Krieg der Zukunft. Auszug aus dem gleichnamigen rus- sischen Werke des Staatsrats Johann von Bloch, mit Geneh- migung des Verfassers herausgegeben von Mitgliedern des Münchener Komitees für Kundgebungen zur Friedens-Kon- ferenz. Berlin 1899. John Bushnell, The Tsarist Officer Corps, 1881-1914; Customs, Duties, Inefficiency. The American Historical Review, Oct. 1981 Gunther Franz, Russlands Eintritt in den Weltkrieg. Der Aus- bau der russischen Wehrmacht und ihr Einsatz bei Kriegsaus- bruch. Mit Genehmigung des Reichsarchives und unter Be- nutzung amtlicher Quellen. Berlin 1924 Dietrich Geyer, Der russische Imperialismus. Studien über den Zusammenhang von innerer und auswärtiger Politik 1860- 1914. Kritische Studien zur Geschichtswissenschaft Bd 27. Göttingen 1977. Raymond L. Gortkoff. Military Influences And Instruments. pp. 243-277 in Russian Foreign Policy; Essays in Historical Per- spective. ed. No J. Lederer. New Haven and London 1962 René Gregerer, Die Russische Flotte im ersten Weltkrieg, 1914-1917. Istorija pervoi mirovoi voiny 1914-1918, I—II. AN SSSR i Ministerstva Oborona SSSR. Moskva 1975 Istorija russko-japonskoi voiny 1904-1905 gg. Ed. I.I. Rostu- nov, AN SSSR i Institut voennoi istorii Ministerstva Oborony SSSR. Moskva 1977 Firuz Kazemzadeh, Russia and Britain in Persia, 1864-1914. A study in Imperialism. Yale Russian and East European Studies 6, Yale University Press 1968 George F. Kennan, The Decline of Bismarck's European Order. 244 Franco-Prussian Relations, 1875-1890. Princeton University Press 1979 Graf V.N. Kokovcov, Iz moego proslago. Vospominanija 1903- 1919, I—II. Parit 1933 General Kuropatkin, Memorien. Die Lehren des Russisch— Japanischen Krieges. Berlin 1909 A.N. Kuropatkin, Zadaci russkoi armii. Rossija dlja russkih. S. Peterburg 1910 Jacques Raphael Leygues & Jean Luc Barre, Delcasse. Paris 1980 Pertti Luntinen, The Baltic Question 1903-1908. Suomalaisen Tiedeakatemian toimituksia B 195, Helsinki 1975 Pertti Luntinen, The Åland Question During the Last years of the Russian Empire. The Slavonic and East European Review 4/1976 Pertti Luntinen, Suomi Pietarin suojana ja uhkana venäläisten sotasuunnitelmissa 1854-1914. Finland, Shield and Threat for St. Petersburg. Historiallinen Arkisto 79, Helsinki 1983 Pertti Luntinen, Venäläisten sotasuunnitelmat Suomen separatismia vastaan. Tampereen yliopisto, Historiatieteen laitoksen julkaisuja 11, Tampere 1984 Ohto Manninen, The Second Russian Pacific Squadron and French Neutrality. Problems during the Russo-Japanese War 1904-1905. Archivum Historicum 68. Helsinki 1975 Baron Boris Nolde, L'alliance franco-russe. Les origines du sys- teme diplomatique d'avant-guerre. Institut d'etudes slaves de l'universite de Paris, Collection Historique VII. Paris 1936 M. Petrov, Podgotovka Rossii k mirovoi voine na more. S pre- disloviem M. Pavloviea. Stab RKKA, upravlenie po issle- dovaniju i ispol'zovaniju opyta voin. Moskva—Leningrad 1926. Raymond Poidevin, Finances et relations internationales 1887- 1914. Paris 1970 A.A. Polivanov, Memuary: iz dnevnikov i vospominanii po dolt- nosti voennago ministra i ego pomoscnika 1907-1916 gg. Red. A.M. Zaionckovskii. Moskva 1924 Tuomo Polvinen, Die finnischen Eisenbahnen in den militäri- schen and politischen Plänen Russlands vor dem ersten Welt- krieg. Studia Historica 4. Helsinki 1962 Douglas Porch, The March to the Marne. The French Army 1871-1914. Cambridge University Press 1981 245 K.F. Bacillo, Rossija pered mirovozl voiny. Vooruzennye sily carizma v 1905-1914 gg. Akademija Nauk SSSR, na&nopopuljarnaja serija. Moskva 1974 K.F. Bacillo. Russkii imperializm i razvitie flota 1906-1914 gg. Moskva 1968 W.N. Suchomlinow, Erinnerungen. Berlin 1924 Edward C. Thaden, ed., Russification in the Baltic Provinces and Finland, 1855-1914. Princeton 1981 L.C.F. Turner, The Russian Mobilisation in 1914. p. 252-266 in The War Plans of the Great Powers, 1880-1914, ed. by M. Kennedy, London 1979 Allan K. Wildman, The End of the Russian Imperial Army. The Old Army and the Soldiers' Revolt, March—April 1917. Princeton University Press 1980 S.Ju. Witte, Vospominanija I—III, Moskva 1960 A.M. Zaionekovskii, Plany voiny. Podgotovka Rossii k imperia- listi6eskoi voine. O6erki voennol podgotovki i pervona6al'nyh planov. Po arhivnym dokumentam. So vstupitel'noi statei M.N. Tuhaeevskago. Stab RKKA, upravlenie po issledovaniju opyta voin. Moskva 1926. P.A. Zaion&kovskii, Voennye reformy 1860-1870 godov v Ros- sii. Moskva 1952 P.A. Zaion&kovskii, Samoderzavie i russkaja armija na rubeze XIX—XX stoletijah, 1881-1903. Moskva 1973

246 INDEX

Abo (Åbo, Turku) 179 Allenstein 66 81 113 167 188 191- Abyssinia 135 192 academy of Finland 9 alliance(s), Anglo-Japanese 90 98-99 academy, Nicholaevan, of general Austro-German 19, Balkan 137, staff 28 20 128 132 Dual, see Dual Alliance, of the First admiralty 145 160 World War 99, Russo-German 93 admiralty council 146 97, Triple, see Triple Alliance Adrianople 138 Alpine passages 166 Adriatic Sea 137 Alsace 15 33 38 51 70-71 75 81 Aegean Sea 135 136 ambassadors, French 82 89 123-124 Aehrenthal 119 ambassadors' conference 137 Afghan frontiers 11 42 56 79 87 99 America 50 169 182 204 American market, Japanese loans on Afghan-Indian frontier 54 86 Afghanistan 13 55-58 77 85 97 Amir 55 Africa 16 74 ammunition, enormous consumption agreement on Baghdad railway 120 of 95 Ahalcyh 62n Amur flotilla 162 Akademija Nauk SSSR 9 Amur 55 61 see also military district Aksakov 12 Anglo-French conflict 89 Albania 137-138 Anglo-Russian conflict 93 Albanian frontier 46 Anglo-Russian frontiers 56 Aleksei Aleksandrovi6 84 101 146 Angora 71 Alexander I 47 64 anti-Semitic policy 86 Alexander II 14 21 64 Apache sailors 149 Alexander III 12 14 18-19 64 193 appeasement of Germany 110 119- Alexander, Prince of Battenberg 11 120 Alexander Mihailovi6 80 84 Arabia 58 Alexandria 45 Archangel 168 Alexandrovo 62n armaments race 20 Alexandrovsk 62n Armenia 39 44 Alexeev, Admiral 81 84 87 Armenian frontier 40 Algeciras 107 Armenian mob 39 Algiers 142 Armenians 177 203

247 army, American 52, Austrian 35 113 Asian continent 130 199, British Indian 77, Bukhara na- Asian colonies of England 140 tive 182, Bulgarian 45-46, Finnish Asian frontiers 36 43 49 63-65 105, French 111-112 Asian problems 110 114 117 124 129 164 166 184 194, Asiatic nomads 22 German 141 168 176 190 199, Asiatic Russia 31 Greek 42, Japanese 87 90 Athens 42 army Russian 22 26-27 29-30 33 Atlantic Ocean 180 35-36 41 47-48 59-61 65 67 80 Aubert, Admiral 156-157 83 94 100-102 105 108-109 111 Australia 50 169 113 116-117 122 124-125 127 129 Austria, Russia's enemy 112 120 123 132-133 167 170 176 171-175 130 155 167 184 201 179-180 185 191 196-198 200 Austrian frontier 24 69 111 134 186 202, on Afghan frontier 78, in Asia 189 34 36 55 98 171, on Baltic coast 36 Austrian influence in the Balkans 11 134 185-185, in Bessarabia 36-37, Austrian Poles 15 130 178 Bohemian 72, Bug 35 37-38 68, Austrian schemes 137 203 Carpathian 72, Caucasian 22 34 36 Austro-Hungarian Empire 43 69, dis- 49 44 55 118 134 172-174, central solving 15 20 70-75 79 110 25 69, Central Asia 77, Chersone- Austro-Russian conflict 15-18, 74 76 sian 36, Crimean 36, in Europe 134 134 172 197-198, Far East 72 92, in autocracy renounced 96 Finland 28 37 65 105 166 197-199, autonomy of Finland 23 64 105 131 Galician 72, facing Germany 92 112 150 180 190, in Kwangtung 62, Manchurian autonomy of Poland 103 91 99-100, in Moscow 34 122, Na- Avellan, Admiral 13 87 rew 66 69 81, Niemen 34 36-37 69 aviation 175 80-81, northern 24-25 34, north- Baghdad 71 120 see also railway western 134-135, in Odessa 44, in "Bajan" 161n Poland 103-104, in St. Petersburg balance of power, European 70 75 34 38 122, principal 25, facing Ro- Balkan "capitals" 137 mania 80, in Sevastopol 44, in Sibe- Balkan crisis 76 135 137-138 164 ria 62 100 118 134 172-174, Balkan Muslims 42 southern 25 30, southern Ussuri 55, Balkan states 136 138 south-western 30 36-38 69 134- Balkan status quo 88 36, Transcaspian 36 53 182, in Tur- Balkan wars 24 135 155 162 kestan 36 53-54 62 134 172 174, Balkans 12 39 43-44 119 127 134 on Turkish frontier 166, Vilna 116, 136 202 204 Vistula 35 37, Warsaw 32 116 Baltic coasts 11 26 37 64 198 army, Swedish 180-181 Baltic Germans 104 army, Turkish 42 44 46 Baltic ports 143 army, see also artillery, cavalry, infan- Baltic provinces 104-105 155 203 try, general staff, generals, military Baltic region 27 districts, officers, soldiers Baltic route 159 artillery 48 50 63 90 171-172 197- Baltic Sea 98 140 147 154 160 163 198 181 Asia 31 99 Baltic straits 180 Asia Minor 45 Bander Abbas 57 Asian bazars 43 Baranovi6i 195 Asian confines 97 Barrere, Ambassador 123

248 16 Belgium 70 165 Brun, General 124-125 Belgrade 42 Bug 35 80 Belostok 36-37 121-122 135 189- Bukhara 23 56 190 196 Bukovina 70-72 Bendery 62n Bulgaria 11 42 44 136 138 137 155 Berlin 34 66-67 81 113 123 184 189 Bulgarian massacres 39 191 195 202 Burgas 45 Berlin congress 11 cadet schools 29 Bessarabia 138 185-186 Cambon, Jules 123 Bezobrazov, State secretary 84-86 cannon 29 91 112 174 Bjelsk 37 193 carabine 63 174 Bismarck 11 13 Carpathian frontier 69-70 Bizerta 141 157-158 168-169 Carpathians 35 67 Black Sea 15 26 40 145 147 149 153- Carykov 136 157 160 162 Caspian ports 148 Black Sea coasts 11 25 169 182 Caspian Sea 54 57 Black Sea, keys of 58 casualties 92 199 Black Sea ports 54 Catherine II 39 Black Sea region 44 Caucasia 21 31-32 62n 111 125 131 Black Sea theatre 116 175 183 196 199 203 Bloch, I.M. 49-51 Caucasian frontier 44 68n 116 130 Blohm & Voss 160 181 Board of Engineers 115 Caucasian Muslims 22 Bobrikov, chief of staff 24 47-49, go- Caucasian provinces 130 vernor-general 49 64-65 105 169 Caucasians 92 Boden 180 Caucasian theatre of war 45 Boers 85 Caucasus 47 57 181 Bohemia 70-72 cavalry 172 174 197-198 200 Boisdeffre, General 14-15 17 34-35 Central Asia 42-43 48 53 55-56 58 127 167 191 77 82 141 182-183 Bologoe 188 195 see also railway Central Asian markets 57 Bolsheviks 203 Central Europe 48 Bombay 169 Central Russia 129 bonapartism 96 Centre Nationale de Recherche Scien- "Borodino" 161-163 tifique 9 Bosnia-Herzegovina 72 119 130 Ceremet'ev 47 Bosnian crisis 126 132 178 Cernjaev 12 53 Bosphorus 40-41 45-46 69 72 140- Channel 78 157 141 see also expedition Charles XII 123 Boström, Admiral chauvinism 154 204 Boxer rebellion 82 chauvinists, Russian 119 150 Serbian Brazilian dreadnoughts 162 119 Breslau 17 34 China 13 82 85 90 110 130 137 Brest(-Litovsk) 14 35 61-62 118 China Sea 140 142 121-122 133 171 187-191 195 Chinese disorders 83 British administration in Egypt 74 Chinese frontiers 42 British Empire 89 Chirlonchon, Commandant 32 British India 54 79 Christian colonial great power 83 British influence 53 57 Christian nations 85 Brjansk 188 Christian population in Poland 179

17 — French information on... 249 ieaev, General 40 177 194-195 202 205 Cimkent 63n defeat in Manchuria 102 117 129 Civil War 177 defensive war 166 colonialists 57 Delanne, General 76 Committee of Imperial Defence see Delcass6 53 70 73-75 79 90 97 140 Council 142 158 164 182 193 202 complicity of Austria, Germany, and Denmark 52 168 180 Russia in Poland 103 depot troops 33 compulsory national service 21 desert nomads 135 Congo 133 deuxieme bureau 37 conservatives 74 99 diplomatic Tsushima 119 138 Constantinople 15 39-40 42 45 53- disciplinary battalions 104 54 58 71 136 155 202 Djibuti 142 constitutional reform 99 division of German forces 81 111 114 constitutionalism in Finland 49 129 134-135 165-166 168 184- consul, French, in Harkov 142, War- 185 194 saw 127 division of Russian forces 129 185- consul, Russian, in Tabris 183, Es- 186 bjerg 168 Dodecanese Islands 136 continental coalition 74 99 107 141 Donets 142 convention see military, naval Dragomirov, General 25 30 34 41 47 convention, Russo-Turkish 40 70 81 91 101 117 122-123 165 Copenhagen 168 "Dreadnought(s)" 154 156 160-162 corps of Pages 29 Dreikaiserbund 11 corruption 102 115 147 159-160 202 Dreyfus affair 78 111 Cossacks 23 34n 60-61 100 118 170- Dreyfus, Paul, Captain 29-31 171 174 182 Dual Alliance 11-12 16 20 41 48 53 Council of Imperial Defence 96 99 117 73-75 78 93 97 103 116-117 119 146 123-124 127 132 135-137 141- Council of ministers 112 193 142 156 158 164 167 190 192 201 Courland 24 27 Dual Alliance, simultaneous action by court 102 204 76 80 165-167 191 194 201-202 Cracow 34 191-192 Dual empire see Austro-Hungarian Cretan disorders 53 empire Cretan question 41 Dubail, General 133 164 Crete 142 Dubno 37 62n Crimea 68n 149 Duma 96 100-101 104 147 152 154 Croatia 72 156 159 161 197 Cross of St. Andreas 163 Dunkirk 168 Cuniberti, Admiral 160 Dtmamünde 27 54 62n Custrin 81 D2arkent 63 customs barrier against Germany 104 East Prussia 34 38 66 77 80-81 111 Dagestani 23 113 121 124 134 167 188-190 195 Danilev, Quartermaster-General 119 199 126 eastern Russia 118 129 135 203 Danish straits 154 eastern Siberia 98-99 Danubian empire see Austro-Hunga- Edirne 138 rian empire Egypt 41 Dardanelles 40 140-141 157 Eiffel Tower 169 decisive battle 75-78 114 121 165 Einkreisung 159 250 emperor see Alexander I—II—III, Nic- Finnish archipelago 152 holas I—II, William II Finnish blood 180 183 England, Russia's enemy 11 74-75 77 Finnish coast 27 152 169 201 Finnish conscripts 65 England, landing in 140-141 Finnish Diet 64 English Asian colonies 140 Finnish Historical Association 9 English commercial preponderance in Finnish law of military service 26 63 China 85 23 English influence in the Baltic 99 in Finnish separatism 155 Persia 59 Finnish tribes 177 English intrigue 87 fleet, Austrian 155-157 English navigations companies 141 fleet, British 15 39-40 42 45-46 157 English neutrality 168 fleet, enemy 157 entente, Anglo-German 13 fleet, French 140 142 156-158 Entente Cordiale 90 93 97 107 110 fleet, German 27 155 159 142 157 192 fleet, Italian 156-157 entente, Russo-English 58 97 108 114 fleets, other Black Sea 162 182, Russo-German 74 120 205, fleet, Russian 19 122 132 153-154 Russo-Japanese 97 108 110, Triple 161-162 Baltic 27 40 91 93 111 136 148 150-152 155 158 161 181, Ergasteria 168 Black Sea 39-40 44-45 140-141 Erzerum 56 130 150 154 155 161n, Far East 158, Me- Esbjerg 168 diterranean 42, Pacific 85 87 90 140 Essen, Admiral v. 148 204 143, volunteer 44-45 Estonia 25 28 36 132 fleet, Turkish 153 156 Estonian sailors 104 Flottenverein 154 Estonians 203 fortifications, fortresses 22 34 113 114 Euro-Asian commerce 57 117 120 122 127 132 152 179 181 Europe 13 20 46 52 72 74-75 137 189 197 199 205 197-198 Francis Joseph 69-70 72-73 88 110 European conflict 183 Franco-English entente see Entente European frontiers, Russia's 98 173 Cordiale European hegemony 30 Franco-Russian alliance see Dual European Russia 31 33 134 172 175 Alliance expedition across the Black Sea 29 37 Frankfurt, peace of 41 41 44-46 67-68 72 80 116 140- Fredrikshamn, peace of 179 141 182 204 freedom of the seas 141 French war archives 7 Far East 38 45 48 54 58 63n 74 81- French frontier 66 76 184 82 84-89 91 110 116 130 142-143 French neutrality 20 156 158 201 204 French people 41 Farman 175 frontier guards 22 171 173 Fashoda 53-54 74 89 Galicia 15 17 35 69-72 75 80 103 121 February Manifesto 64 135 188 204 Ferdinand, Prince, of Coburg 11 Gallipoli 42 141 Finland 9 22 26 28 32 37 63 65 105 "Gangut" 160-163 118 125 131 132 155 157 166 179 gendarmes 22 105 172 181 197-199 203 generals 63 65 70 101-102 126-128 Finljandskil regiment 65 202 Finns 129 131 180 general inspector of the army 47 251 general staff academy see academy of grand dukes 93 101 the general staff Grand Fleet 162 general staff, French 15 17 46 69 89 Grand Imperial Navy 163 91 110 112 114 117 120-121 128 Great Russians 178 164 166 169 191-192 Greece 41 43 46 138 168 177 general staff, Prussian Grand 24 Grenadiers 22 25 37 134 185-187 199 general staff, Russian 8 23 26-27 32 Grey, Sir Edward 137 35 38 42-44 47 51 53 55-56 58 66 Grigorovi, Admiral 147 159-160 71-73 75 80 88-90 96 99 102 114 Grilliers, Lieutenant 56 117 123 125-126 133 137 164 167 Grodno 37 62n 121-122 190 176 189 190-191 196 199 201 204- Guards 22 25 32 37-38 65 97 99 102 205 117 132 134 176 187 198-199 general staff chiefs, meetings of 8 13- Gulf of Finland 25 27 132 139 152 163 14 31 50 76 79-80 107-111 113- 181 115 123-124 126 128 166 193-194 Gulf of Riga 27 202 Gurko, Field Marshal 14 24-25 34- Georgievsk 62n 35 47 Gerenig 62n Gypsies 177 German ambassador in Russia 159 Habarovsk 174 German coast 27 151 Habsburg Empire see Austro- German empire 15 52 70 Hungarian empire German frontier 67 77 123 124-125 Hague 52 134-135 165 183 186 201 Hamburg 71 German influence in Persia 58, in Hanko 152 Russia 47 96 122, in Sweden 181, in Hanotaux 74 Turkey 71-72 181 202 Hanriot 175 German menace 24 27 74 90 93 105 Hapag 93 117 131-132 153 156 168 181 186 Harbin 83 198 201 Harkov 142 German Poles 178 Hat§ina 175 German Pressure 168 180 Heligoland 13 German provinces of Austria see Helsinki 9 65 152 Austro-Hungarian empire Herat 55-57 Germany, principal enemy 20 74 78- High command 12 97 176 79 109 115 124 127-129 155 160 Hindukush 57 167 184 194 201 Hodikent 63n Gerngross, General 124-126 Holstein 52 Gibraltar 88 Hungary 70-71 Golos Moskvy 127 Hunhuzes 83 Gomel 26 188 Hunza 62n Goremykin 199 Ignat'ev, Ambassador 12 43 governments, allied 126 "Ilja Muromec" 175 government, French 89 97 132 Imperial Naval Cabinet 146 government, Russian 32 39 42 64 72 imperial treasury 159 89 107 115 136-137 152 158 169 imperialism 9 57 82 86 96-97 139 180 196 202 204 141-142 156 204 governor-generals 21 indelta 23 Grand Admiral of Russia 146 indemnity to Japan 96 Grand Duchy see Finland India 50 55 57-58 77-78 141 Grand Duchy, the navy 146 Indian frontier 42 53 75 89 99 182 204 252 Indian Ocean 57 73 140 142 204 Kovel 121 188 195-196 Indochina 110 140 Kovno 61 62n 135 188 190 infantry 92 171-172 185 198 200 Krasnojarsk 100 Ino 151 Krasnovodsk 62n Ionian Sea 157 Krasnye Gorki 27 151 insurgents in Finland 131 Kriegsschuldfrage 205 insurrection in Caucasia 111 Kronstadt 25 27 54 61 62n 142 148n Irkutsk 100 174 151-152 160 173 Islamic revival 43 Kuropatkin, General 47-48 50 53- Istria 70-71 58 64-65 67 81 83 85-86 92 94 Italy 12-13 15-16 18-19 24 40 42 117 52 70-71 76 113-114 124 134- Kursk 26 188 135 137 157 165-166 204 Kushka 55 62n Ivangorod 35 61 62n 122 192 Kwangtung 61 87 Izvol'skil 97-99 108 115 119 132- Kymijoki 151 133 138 Königsberg 17 188 Jabinka 188 191 195 Ladebatt, General 112 124 127 133 Janin, Lieutenant-Colonel 128-129 Laguiche, General 120 170 131-132 134 180 Lamsdorff, minister for foreign affairs Januäkeviö, General 126 199 79-80 84 97 Japan 74 81 84 86 88 95-96 137 183 lance 174 Japanese imperialism 82 85 87 130 landing see expedition across the 204 Black Sea, German menace, Sedish Japanese war 36 48 81 87 98 107 menace 109-110 117 130 140 155 177 182 Laojan 90 92 Jews 32 50 86 131 149 177-179 203 League for the Restoration of the Jesuit 99 Navy 154 Joffre 164 166-167 185 192-195 197 Lemberg 34 188 July crisis 197 205 Lena 149 junker schools 29 Lenin Library 9 Kaiser see William II Letts 177 203 Kaleva Senior High School 9 Liaotung 82 Kamenno-Polock 37 Libau 27 54 62 148 151 168 Kandahar 56 Libya 135 Karlskrona 168 Liewen, Prince 156-158 Kars 44 Lineviö, General 94 Katkov 12 Lithuania 103 Kazan 172 Little Russians 178 Kerki 63n Ljakov, General 183 Kerb, Kertch, 62n 153 loan, Japanese 86, Russian 193 196 Khorasan 56 local troops 34n 172 Kiderlen-Wächter 119 133 Lor 2a 37 189 Kiev see also military district 21 25 London 170 41 47 117 122 175 184 188 195 197 Lorraine 15 33 38 51 70-71 75 121 Kisinev 37 Louis, Ambassador 125 127 Kokovtsov 126 138 158 193 196-197 Lublin 80 133 199 Luck 37 Komarov, General 53 Luninec 195 Korea 85-88 97 Macedonia 42-46 136-137 Korean frontier 86 Macchiavellian 21 137

253 machine gun 174 military tax 23 65 105 Madagascar 142 militia, French 111 Mahan, Captain 154 militia, Russian 21-22 26 60 95 117 Malacca 140 134 170-171 Malta 140 Miljutin, General 21 23-24 48 117 Manchuria 82-83 85-87 91-92 99- minister of court 48 100 108-109 minister of finance 90 159 193 202 Manchurian war see Japanese war minister of Navy 84 146 154 159 manifest destiny of Russia 56 82 minister of war 21 47 81 88 117 119 Marchand, Major 53 126 Margelan 63n ministers, civilian 138 Maritza 45 ministers, Russian and French, for fo- Marne 195 reign affairs 19 Matton, military attaché 20-21 28 33 ministry, French, for foreign affairs 120 128 136-138 170 201 205 78 90 124 Maude, Dr. George 9 ministry, French, war 69 192 Mediterranean 13 42 53 70 73 140- ministry, Russian, of colonies 84 142 155 157-158 204 ministry, Russian, of finance 11 22 Mejlis 183 115 Meller-Zakomelskil, General 100 ministry, Russian, of foreign affairs Memel 27 72-73 90 133 153 Mery 55 57 62n ministry, Russian, of navy 150 152 Mesopotamia 58 ministry, Russian, war 21 48 64 96- Middle East 56 74 97 117 Mihailovsk 62n Minsk 26 133 169 military attaché, Bulgarian 189 mobilisation see Dual Alliance, simul- military attaché, English 189 taneous action, and problems of military attaché, French, see also La- Russian mobilisation guiche, Matton, Moulin 8 26-27 33 Mohrenheim, Ambassador 13 38 40 46 103 108 198 201-202 Moltke, General 24 military cabinet, unofficial 48 Montenegro 42 46 136 139 169 military convention, Franco-Russian Mongolia 97 19 75-76 79 111 115 120 124 126- Moonsound 152 127 140 156 158 164 166 193 Morocco 97-99 107 132-133 135- military convention, Russo-Bulgarian 136 164 116 Moscow 33-34 66 96 99 118 122 171 military district 21 125 172, Amur 36 174 188 49 62 83 87 174, Caucasia 55 87 174 Moskovskil regiment 65 204, Finland 65, Irkutsk 36 174, Ka- Moulin, military attaché 27-28 33 37 zan 55 174, Kiev 30-31 36-38 60 40 44 47 50 53-54 56 58-60 63- 100 108 174, Moscow 31 33 99 174, 64 68-70 72-74 83-84 87-91 94 Odessa 31 36 45 174, Omsk 36 174, 99-101 103-104 108 110-111 St. Petersburg 31 33 37 48 64 66 97 113-117 120 128 139 201 205 100 102 117 132 174 198, Siberia 55 Mukden 91 94 83 87, Transcaspian 93, Turkestan Murav'ev 50-51 74-75 158 97 174, Vilna 31 36-37 66 108 133 Muscovite offensive 180 174 185, Warsaw 31-32 35 37 66 Muslims 22 42-44 100 130 203 92 108 118 133 174 185 189 194 Mussin-Puskin, General 47 49 military millions 179 mutiny 145 149 177 military schools 29 Napoleon 92 123

254 Napoleonic 48 Novo-Aleksandrovsk 37 Narew 35 66 68-69 80-81 113 Novoe Vremja 57 74 141 Nargen 152 Novo-Georgievsk 61 62n 135 169 189 Narva 27 151 Obolenskii, Prince, general-gouvernor National Assembly, French 127 105 national minorities 177 Obrutev, General 14-18 34-35 47- national revival 164 48 76 126 164 nationalism 203 Oeakov 62n nationalist feeling 129 Oder 38 67 nationalists, Russian 96 Odessa 31 36-37 40 44-45 47 49 naval administration, corrupt 159 68n 116 141 169 174 188 naval attaches 139 147 152-155 157 officers, German 52, French 29 177, naval convention 140 142 156 158- Polish 32, Prussian 29, Russian 28- 159 30 69 95 100 102 109 171 176 202 naval general staff 96 140 142 144 146 Old Russia 202 156 Olita 37 naval visit 13 Omsk 36 100 174 navy, American 52 opposition, Finnish 105 navy, British 93 Oranienbaum 27 navy, grand imperial 163 Orel 188 195 navy, Ottoman 146 Orenburg 56 navy, Russian 40 84 140 145 148 150 Orient 33 71 119 127 201 153 156 170 orthodox population in the Balkans Near East 11 13 38-39 43 53 74 136 39 156 204 Ossets 23 Nebogatov, Admiral 143 Ossovec 62 122 Neo-Slavist feeling 138 Pacific Ocean 72 147 154-155 158 Nicholaevan Academy of the General 162 Staff, see Academy Pacific region 90 Nicholas I 64 Palestine 45 Nicholas II 47 50-51 64-65 70 73- Palicyn, General 96 98-99 104 107- 75 79 84-86 88 94 96-97 101 104 108 110-117 120 126 169 117 119 158-159 195 202 Pan-Germanic dreams, intrigues Niemen 34 36-37 69 80-81 113 133 104-105 Nieuport 175 Pan-Islamic ideas 43 72 130 203 Nikolaev 148n 160 Pan-Slavists 12 42 64 69 108 137 Nikolaevsk 63n 174 Pan-Turkish ideas 43 Nikolai Nikolaevie the Elder 101 Paris 11 24 41 49-51 69 90 99 120 Nikolai Nikolaevie, Grand Duke 96- 127 132 169-170 193 97 101 117 125 parliamentarism 96 Nile 54 Pavlovskif regiment 65 North Africa, French 169 patriots 71 131 204 North Sea 140 151 157 Peeili 83 North Sea incident 93-94 Peking 83 northern menace 181 Pendezec, General 78-81 Norway 169 180 Penza 195 Norwegian fjords 180 Perovski 63n non-commissioned officers 29 Persia 56-59 85 97 120 130 133 182- Novgorod 132 183 204 Novipazar, Sandjak of 136 Persian Gulf 56-59 204 255 Persians 177 Russian 48 73 82 110 132-133 138 Peter I 39 82 130 Puzerevskif, General 41 47 pilot and lighthouse service in Fin- Quai d'Orsay 9 land 150 radicals, French 111 v. Plehwe 64 84 railway(s), Anatolian 130 in Asia Mi- Plevna 29 nor 166, Austrian 166, Baghdad 58 Pobedonoscev 64 120 133, Bologoe-Sedlec 79-80 Podolia 185 186 89-90 114-115, Caucasian 130, Poincare 158-159 164-165 192 Central Asian 90, in Courland 27, poilus 175 French 116 191, German 77, guard Pola 73 in Manchuria 87, Manchurian 58 88 Poland 14-15 24 31 34-36 38 47 66 96, Mery-Kushka 55, Orenburg-Tash- 69 80-81 91 98 103-105 111 118 kent 56 79 89-90, in Persia 58, in 121-122 127-128 130-131 179 Poland 32 68 103, private 192, Rus- 185 188 190 201 sian 27 31 77-78 110 131 153 187 Poles 52 70 129-130 177-178 190 191-192 205, Siberian 56 58 82- 203 84 90, strategic 26 31 51 75 89 167 Poles, Austrian 15 130 178 171 188 193 195-196 202, Tash- Poles, German 178 kent-Tomsk 56, Transcaspian 53 Polish aspirations 103-104 127 56 58 77 Polish contingent in Russian army rebellion, Boxer 82, in Estonia 104, Fin- 103 land 111 150 181, in Manchuria 100, Polish hatred of Russia 32 in Moscow 96 99, in Poland 32 103 Polish rebels 32 103 Red Army 8 Polish recruits 32 104 Red Sea 142 Polish salient 118 122 165 178 188 Reich 104 Poltava 188 195 Rennenkampf, General 100 Porch, Douglas 112 Reinsurance Treaty 11 13 Porkkala 152 reserve troops, reservists 21-22 25- Port Arthur 55 58 63n 82 83 90 94 26 31 33 36 60-61 95 117-118 143 134-135 170-172 185 198 Porte 136 Reval 28 148n 152 157 Portsmouth 95-96 revolution(aries) 94 103 105 129 149 Posen 17 34-35 103 121 167 192 195 177 202 Potsdam 119 126-128 164 Rhine 15 165 pre-dreadnoughts 151 Ribot, minister for foreign affairs 13 Preobrazenskii regiment 101 Riga 25 133 188 prisoners of war 96 rifle 29 62 174 problems of Russian mobilization 17 Riksdag 180 26 31 33 121 128 131 164-165 172 Rjazan 193 195 187 203 Roediger, General 96 102 119 Proskurov 37 188 Romania 18 45-46 70 111 130 138 Prussia 104 187 183 Prussian danger 29 Romanian frontier 68n Prussian frontier 68 80 135 188 195 Romanians 17 67 72 Prussian victories 24 177 Rome 123 Prussians 184 Roosevelt 94 Pskov 132 Rovno 121 193 195 public opinion, British 53, European Rozestvenskii, Admiral 143-144 156 44 123, Finnish 179, German 53, "Rurik" 162n 256 Russia one and indivisible 104 Siberia 55 61 77 83 87 124 174-175 Russian colossus 165 199 Russian empire 56 149 179 199 203 sick man of Europe 39 Russian foreign policy 120 Sikorsky 175 Russian frontier of Finland 179 Silvestre, General 91 Russian historical interests 155 Skobelev, General 12 53 Russian Navigation Company 45 Slays, brother 15 119 Russian race 178 Slav character 28 175 Russian sea power 141 Slav peoples 14 39 71-72 138 Russian securities 99 Slav soul 202 Russian sloth 160 Slav states 73 Russian straits 39 Slav vanguard 70 Russification 23 65 105 129 149 178- Slesvig 52 180 Slovenia 72 Russo-English conflict 13 182 Smolensk 195 Russo-French alliance see Dual Alli- socialism 50 ance 84 Sofia 42 Russo-German agreement 119-120 soldier(s), European 87, German 29, 133 Russian 28-29 70 94 175 202 Russo-Japanese war see Japanese war South Africa 58 75 85 169 Russo-Polish detente 178 South Russian ports 136 Russo-Turkish convention 40 South-East Asia 57 Ruthenians 70 Soviet archives 7 Soviet historians 47 sabre 174 Spanish allies of France 143 Saharov, General 48 51 67 70 76-81 Sretensk 83 87-89 91 94 109 126 status quo in Central Asia 58 sailors 115 171 status quo in Near East (Balkans and Sakhalin 96 the Straits) 41 44 47 88 119 136 155 Salonica 42 71 Stolypin 96 119 133 138 149 158 Samarkand 55 63n 66 St. Petersburg 8 25 27 31 33 37 42 Sarny 195 48-49 64-66 72-73 84-85 91 97 Saros Island 42 100 102 105 117 120 122-123 127- Sazonov 119 136 138 158 192 197 199 128 131-134 144 148n 151 153 157 Scandinavia 170 160 166 170 174-175 179 181 188 Schauman, Eugen 65 192 198 Schlieffen Plan 184 Suda bay 41 Schnaebele-affair 18 Suez 41 85 Sedlec 37 118 188 191 195 Suhomlinov, General 97 117-126 138 Semenovskif regiment 65 197 199 201 semicolonial dependence 115 Sultan 39 41 43-45 55 72 Senate, Finnish 105 Sumatra 142 separate peace 124 Suvalki 37 separatism, Finnish 49 155 204 Suvalov, Count 47 Serbia 42 46 52 119 136-138 Suvorov, Field Marshal 30 Serbo-Bulgarian war 11 Sveaborg 27 61 62n 148n 152 169 Sevastopol 37 40-41 44 54 62 116 Sweden 64 111 131 155 158 166 180 141 148 153 160 168-169 175 194 204 Shah 58 182 Sweden-Norway 168 Shimonoseki 53 74 Swedish menace 155 157 167 181 198 257 Swedish influence in Finland 131 157 Turks 92 136 156 183 203-204 180 Ufa 118 Switzerland 70 Ukraine 25 103 130 Syria 41 58 Ukrainians 178 Tabriz 183 ultimatum, German in 1909 119 de la Taillie, Captain 57 Upper Silesia 72 Tampere 9 Urals 118 130 Tangier 97 USA 65 160 176 Tartars 23 177 Ust-Dvinsk 62n Tashkent 54 56 63n Vannovskii, Colonel 87-88 le Temps 122 Vannovskii, General 17 47-48 54 117 Terijoki 151 Varna 45 territorial system of recruiting 117- Vienna 73 202 118 128 131 Viikovicki 37 Thorn 66 167 188 191-192 Vilna 21 24 28 31 34 36-37 66 108 Thrace 45-46 122 133 174 184-185 Tibet 97 Vincennes 7 9 The Times 51 Vindava 27 Tiflis 116 Vistula 17 35 38 66 80-81 113 122 Togo, Admiral 145 133 167 184 189 195-196 Toulon 13 Vladikavkas 55 Transcaspia 55 62n 93 204 Vladimir, Grand Duke 24 49 Transylvania 70 72 138 Vladivostok 54 62 82-83 88 142 148n treaty of friendship with China 82 173-174 197 Trentino 52 70 Voisin 175 Trieste 52 70 73 Volga 130 196 Triple Alliance 12-20 33 38 65-66 Volynia 80 185-186 71-72 74-76 78 130-131 136 146 Voronin, military attaché 70 73 156 204 Vyborg (Viipuri) 62n 64 180 Triple Entente 136 war, aims 15 16, of attrition 195, Bal- Tsar 88 96 99 138 see also Alexander, kan 24 135 155 182, Civil 177, Euro- Nicholas pean 91 136, Franco-Austrian 24, Tsargrad 39 Franco-German 18, great 52 138, Tsarism 102 129 149 203 inevitable 205 206, Serbo-Bulgarian Tshadaldsha line 40 1886 11, South-African 58 75 85, Tsushima 91 94 143 145 150 153 Turkish-Italian 137, on two fronts Tula 193 195 197, prolonged 196, World 9 206 Turkestan 54-55 57 61 63n 87 98 130 Warsaw 21 28 31-32 34-35 37-38 174 197 199 41 49 61 62n 66 92 108 113 118 Turkey 39 41-43 67 71-72 130 135- 121-122 127 133 167 172 174 185 138 140-141 157-158 162 166 168 188 189-197 181-182 194 202 Wehrlin, Captain 170 191 Turkish menace 116 130 160 162 Western Europe 101 202 166-167 western Balkans 42 Turkish straits 15 39 41-44 53 74- western frontier 196 75 97 119 136 141 155-157 168 204 western provinces 126 129 western Siberia 98 Turkish troops in Armenia 44, in Me- White Russians 178 202 sopotamia 46 William II 13 38 48 69 72-74 91 97 Turkmen(s) 23 92 99 104-105 117 119 258 wireless telegraphy 115 169 Zaizanski 63n Witte 42 50-51 56 82-84 90 96-97 Zakataly 62n workers 100 149-150 160 177 Zanzibar 13 169 Yalu 86 Zegrie 62n 122 189 Yellow Peril 74 2ilinskii, General 126 133 136 138 Young Turk revolution 119 135 164 166 169 192-195 Zaionekovskii, A.M. 7-8 24 35 69 Åland Islands 152 154 160 181 116 118

259 ...~,,~... ~~,~v:ti-n..._,..~..ti~..~.,.~..~,.~. ~ .~,.,m::,~ s ---